Steve Thomas - IT Consultant

Apple’s M series chips were incredibly well telegraphed when they arrived in late 2021. Apple had been designing its own silicon since the A4 appeared in the iPhone 4 just over a decade earlier. The appearance of Apple’s in-house efforts in the Mac was really just a question of when, not if.

When the M1 came, it landed with a resonating bang. In addition to being genuinely noticeably faster, the chips were seen as a big step forward for portable computing because of their shockingly improved “performance per watt” that allowed for full-speed processing while on battery power with increased usage times.

Apple has just launched the next iteration of the M line with this year’s M2 MacBook Pro and Mac mini models — officially denoting this as an ongoing series rather than a one-off leap. With confirmed 20% improvements in CPU and 30% in GPU performance in under 2 years and a really aggressive entry price point, the M2 adds to Apple’s lead in portable chipsets.

I was able to spend a bit of time talking to Apple’s vice president of Platform Architecture and Hardware Technologies Tim Millet, as well as VP of Worldwide Product Marketing Bob Borchers about the impact of the M chips so far, how they see the line developing over time and a bit about gaming too.

Resetting the baseline

“A lot of it comes down to the people and the talent on Tim’s team,” says Borchers, “but I think a lot of it also comes down to the way that we’ve approached designing Apple silicon from the very beginning.”

Millet has been building chips for 30 years and has been at Apple for nearly 17. He says that with M1, Apple saw an opportunity to “really hit it.”

“The opportunity we had with M1 the way I looked at it, it was about resetting the baseline.”

When their desktop computing and laptop computing pipeline was essentially controlled by the third-party merchants and silicon vendors, it didn’t really allow for Apple to push the bar closer to the limits of technology.

This need to own and “reset” the baseline of portable performance in computing coalesced around the time that Apple started working on the iPad Pro. They had been building chips inside of these super-thin enclosures and knew that, with ready power and much larger casings, they could make a significant impact on portable computing.

“Once we started getting to the iPad Pro space, we realized that ‘you know what, there is something there.’ We never, in building the chips for iOS devices, left anything on the table. But we realized that these chips inside these other enclosures could actually make a meaningful difference from a performance perspective. And so with M1 we were super excited about the opportunity to have that big impact — shifting all of it back up to redefining what it meant to have a laptop in many different ways.”

“The opportunity we had with M1 the way I looked at it, it was about resetting the baseline.” Tim Millet, Apple VP

The work that Apple did with the M1 wasn’t focused on pure peak performance, says Millet. From the beginning, there was this idea that they’d be able to reset user expectations around what kind of performance you should be able to get out of a portable computer, and for how long. The focus on performance per watt paid off (as noted in my early review of Apple’s first M1 chip), in that people could run major compute tasks on laptops untethered from power for hours. No compromises. That, says Millet, wasn’t a byproduct — it was the intent from the beginning.

“We wanted to have the ability to build a scale of solutions that deliver the absolute maximum performance for machines that had no fan; for machines that had active cooling systems like our pro class machines. We wanted to…move performance per watt to the point where we delivered real usable performance in these in a wide range of machines.”

Apple vice president of Platform Architecture and Hardware Technologies Tim Millet

Apple vice president of Platform Architecture and Hardware Technologies Tim Millet

Millet says that Apple was pleased with what it had been able to ship with M1 and that it served those goals. My own experiences and those of power-hungry users mirrored that sentiment once the machines began to ship. For decades, Apple had been running up against third-party stewardship over chipset speeds, power requirements and features — with the result of increasingly less mobile computers that ran hot, loud and short. The whole portable industry had been constricting that flexibility for so long that most users (aside from those of us who spend our lives closely examining these boundaries) probably didn’t realize how hard it was for them to breathe.

The M1 whacked a big old reset button on those restrictions, putting portable back into the power computing lexicon. And with M2, Millet says, Apple did not want to milk a few percentage points of gains out of each generation in perpetuity.

“The M2 family was really now about maintaining that leadership position by pushing, again, to the limits of technology. We don’t leave things on the table,” says Millet. “We don’t take a 20% bump and figure out how to spread it over three years…figure out how to eke out incremental gains. We take it all in one year; we just hit it really hard. That’s not what happens in the rest of the industry or historically.”

Borchers chimes in to note that Apple is building products, not parts. This gives it a much tighter loop between needs and deliverables. He notes that the pairing of the technology and product is not an independent choice at Apple; it’s silicon, software and hardware coming together, starting at the point of inception. It’s not “Can we do this?” and then waiting to see if a vendor can deliver the appropriate capability.

“As somebody who’s been building silicon for 30-plus years, the luxury of knowing what the target is, and working side by side with the product designers, the hardware system team, the software people to understand exactly what you’re aiming at, makes all the difference in our ability to really target and make sure we’re adding things that matter, not adding anything that doesn’t,” Millet agrees.

Forcing functions and forgetting fans

For much of the modern history of the Mac, after Apple moved from PowerPC to x86 in 2006, it has had less immediate control over capability in its machines. Whatever it hoped to accomplish with a new machine, it had to include an external factor in there, with external partners like Intel delivering on their own timelines and complexities. There was a forcing function in place. That partner is telling you, “This is what we can deliver you on your scale in this timeframe for these applications,” which cascades all the way through to product design and development.

Apple retaking control of its silicon pipeline also reset the size and complexity of that development feedback loop, which prompts me to ask them whether that relationship has changed internally at Apple post-M1.

“If you go back to the phone, we had that tight interaction really, from the very beginning — and I think that’s true for all of the iOS products. We had that tight feedback loop,” says Millet.

Both Millet and Borchers are diplomatic about the Intel partnership (which is till present, for now, in Apple’s Mac Pro machines).

“Intel was a great partner through the years where we shipped the Intel machines. They were very responsive; they really actually were inspired by the direction that Apple pushed them. And I think our products benefited from that interaction. Of course, our competitors’ products benefited from that interaction as well sometimes,” notes Millet.

But, undoubtedly, the relationship between what Apple wants to ship and what it can ship has been radically altered now that the M-series chips are in the breadth of its lineup. Apple’s chip team working closely with internal teams has been a natural part of Apple’s device pipeline since it began work on the iPhone 4. Now that system has expanded to envelop the Mac branch as well.

“I think it felt very natural for us to sit down side by side with our industrial design partners and our system team partners inside Apple because they’re familiar faces to us,” Millet says. “These are people that we’ve been working with for iPad and iPhone. And it really felt very, very natural. It’s a very Apple way of working where we are all sitting at the table together, imagining possibilities and them challenging us and us going back and doing the math to kind of figure out that ‘yeah, I think we can do that without a fan.’”

Borchers sparks on my use of the term “feedback loop” and notes that it’s less that the loop is smaller and instead that it has been eliminated.

“[That term] implies some sense of latency or delay in the cycle,” he says. “And I think that it’s an appropriate way of thinking when you’ve got multiple parties involved. I think that the big difference here is that we move from having a feedback loop to co-creation, where there isn’t a feedback loop…You [just] sit down at a table and push each other. Okay, well, what if we got rid of the fan? And it doesn’t require this latency in the system, which I think has efficiency gains, but it also unleashes your creativity in new ways. So I actually think you hit on something interesting there in kind of this difference between a feedback loop and a different kind of process.”

M2 Max features 67 billion transistors, 400GB/s of unified memory bandwidth, and up to 96GB of fast, low-latency unified memory.

M2 Max features 67 billion transistors, 400GB/s of unified memory bandwidth, and up to 96GB of fast, low-latency unified memory. (Image: Apple)

Gaming on the Mac

One arena still holds fascination for any of us who have found a home on the Mac for nearly every part of our digital life — save one: gaming. The M-series Macs are undoubtedly more gaming capable than any previous Mac due to the inclusion of much-improved onboard GPUs across the lineup. But even with big titles popping up on Mac in spurts, there still is a fairly large section of “here there be dragons,” where you would think Apple would like to map in the multi-billion-dollar gaming market.

Borchers says that Apple is feeling like the Apple silicon gaming story is getting more solid release by release.

“With Capcom bringing Resident Evil across, and other titles starting to come along, I think the AAA community is starting to wake up and understand the opportunity,” he says. “Because what we have now, with our portfolio of M-series Macs, is a set of incredibly performant machines and a growing audience of people who have these incredibly performant systems that can all be addressed with a single code base that is developing over time.

“And we’re adding new APIs in and expanding Metal in Metal 3, etc. And then if you think about the ability to extend that down into iPad, and iPhone as well, I think there’s tremendous opportunity.”

He acknowledges that Apple needs to do work to bring game developers along the road to adoption, but he says the company is happy that they’ve shipped the core ingredients in very performant systems. He says that the team has been and will continue to look at a variety of chip configurations and components through that gaming lens as well. Anyone who games on the Mac should find room for encouragement in the way Millet says that the team is focusing here, though time will tell.

Millet says that Apple’s work on cracking the gaming market started with the early days of the Apple silicon transition.

“The story starts many years ago, when we were imagining this transition. Gamers are a serious bunch. And I don’t think we’re going to fool anybody by saying that overnight we’re going to make Mac a great gaming platform. We’re going to take a long view on this.”

He notes that Apple offers common building blocks that are shared, scaled appropriately, between the Mac, iPhone and iPad where Apple has historical strength. But he also points out that the purpose-built GPUs in the iOS devices weren’t intended to be general use.

“We weren’t going to design GPUs for that space that were unnecessarily complicated, that had features that were not relevant to iOS,” he notes. “But as we looked at the Mac, we realized that this is a different beast. There will be different expectations over time — let’s make sure we have our toolbox complete.

“And so we did very directed work to make sure that the GPU toolbox was there — working super closely with our Metal partners. We worked hand in hand to make sure that they were going to have all the tools that they needed to accelerate the important APIs that we’re going to deliver to [companies like] Capcom, for example. So that when Capcom approached us, it wasn’t going to be this awkward port for them. It was going to be a very natural ‘Ah, you do support these modern APIs that gamers are needing. This is interesting.’”

That, in turn, makes it simpler to approach game developers with a strong set of tools that feel familiar enough and compatible enough with their existing workflows to make porting games or building for the Mac viable.

“My team spends a lot of time thinking about how to make sure that we’re staying on that API curve to make sure that we’re giving Metal what it needs to be a modern gaming API. We know this will take some time. But we’re not at all confused about the opportunity; we see it. And we’re going to make sure we show up.”

He also acknowledges that it will take time to build an installed base of strong GPUs in order for it to be enticing to the AAA space.

“The other thing we wanted to do, and I think we have hopefully done, is to seed the Mac, the full Mac lineup, with very capable GPUs, whether it be the MacBook Air, obviously, all the way up to the beast, Ultra chips that we can put in our Mac Studio.”

“Because until you do that, until you have a population distributed, developers are going to be wary about making a big investment and kind of focus on Mac,” Millet acknowledges.

So Apple will continue to seed the Mac population as people upgrade from Intel to M1 or M2, and it will, hopefully, become more and more obvious to developers that the Mac population at large has a machine that is capable of running major titles at a frame rate that is acceptable to gamers.

Millet also is unconvinced that the game dev universe has adapted to the unique architecture of the M-series chips quite yet, especially the unified memory pool.

“Game developers have never seen 96 gigabytes of graphics memory available to them now, on the M2 Max. I think they’re trying to get their heads around it, because the possibilities are unusual. They’re used to working in much smaller footprints of video memory. So I think that’s another place where we’re going to have an interesting opportunity to inspire developers to go beyond what they’ve been able to do before.”

The custom technologies of M2 Pro and M2 Max include Apple’s next-generation, 16-core Neural Engine and new powerful, efficient media engines with hardware-accelerated H.264, HEVC, and ProRes video encode and decode.

The custom technologies of M2 Pro and M2 Max include Apple’s next-generation, 16-core Neural Engine and new powerful, efficient media engines with hardware-accelerated H.264, HEVC, and ProRes video encode and decode. (Image: Apple)

When computer?

Historically, the most vibrant chatter about the Mac is about the next Mac. No matter what gains or features Apple delivers with a particular system, the question readers and friends are always hitting me with is, “When is the next one coming, and is it worth waiting for?” Lest you think it’s just happening out here in user land, Millet says that he gets it, too.

“Friends and family reach out all the time and they say, ‘Hey, I’m thinking about getting a new Mac, wink, wink. Is now a good time?’ And what’s beautiful about this story is that I really, with full sincerity, believe now is always a good time…Nobody should be shy about it.”

“I don’t think we’re going to fool anybody by saying that overnight we’re going to make Mac a great gaming platform. We’re going to take a long view on this.” Tim Millet, Apple VP
This wave of updates from the Mac with M2 onboard are so impressive that it stops that sentiment short of being too self-serving. The broad consensus, in fact, is that the M2 Mac mini is probably the best-value computer that Apple has ever shipped — and may actually be the best value in desktop computing period. At $599 for the base model, it comes in at a lower price than the previous M1 model and is incredibly capable — clocking in at around 20% faster. Even with that nice positioning, however, the previous year’s model remains more than viable for all of the use cases in that band.

Apple has managed to find a sweet spot that allows the bulk of customers to “buy whenever,” knowing that the M-series chips are indeed that good. Millet says that Apple knows that the top few percent of power-hungry users that want the edge on capability are savvy enough to know the rough release timeline of the “new Macs” and will wait for it.

“That 20% is going to make a big difference to some folks. Absolutely. And they will wait for that moment [when] they can see it because they have workloads that require it,” Millet says, while noting that they’re confident enough in the satisfaction levels of buyers of M1 that they’re not going to hold off.

“If you bought a MacBook Pro last year with M1, you’re gonna be fine. [Even] if you bought it in December, you’re not going to come screaming at me telling me I hate this machine, [and] why didn’t you tell me to wait?”

One rationale for shipping M2 is also that Apple wanted to establish the line in a regular cadence. It was important, Millet says, to make sure people didn’t see the M1 as a “one and done.”

As far as the “when Macs” question goes, Millet and Borchers are both in the “when possible, ship” camp. Coming out of a period pre-M1, when many in the Mac ecosystem felt that it was being underinvested in, it’s clear that Apple wants to send a message that this is not the case and they never want that to become a meme again.

“As a silicon person, I know that technology moves fast and I don’t want to wait around. I certainly want to push hard, as you can imagine,” says Millet. “We want to get the technology into the hands of our system team as soon as possible, in the hands of our customer as soon as possible. We don’t want to leave them wondering…do they not care about us? A new phone shipped last year. Why didn’t the Mac get the love?”

“We want to reset to the technology curve and then we want to live on it. We don’t want the Mac to stray too far away from it.”

Borchers says that the opportunity for Apple lies in the fact that the vast majority of Mac customers are on Intel machines. This makes it less of an “it’s been a year, we have to ship something” situation.

“We’re just trying to make it more and more of an easy decision to move…to an even more amazing system,” he says.

When positioned year over year, the gains are absolutely solid. But if Apple is marketing to, and eyeballing the opportunity of, millions of current Intel Mac users, then the calculus (for them) becomes easier. As proud as the team is of the M1 to M2 speed jump, Borchers says, the real messaging is around the leap from just 2 years ago — especially for the Mac mini, where the leaps are in the 10x and up multiples of performance. All in a price that’s $100 cheaper than the M1 Mac mini and $200 cheaper for students.

“We’re product people at the end of the day, and we want to put our systems in as many hands as possible,” says Borchers. “We feel like the Mac mini form factor is such a great way to unleash creativity and, frankly, goodness in the world that we wanted to be able to put it in as many people’s hands as possible.

“We don’t think about [Mac pricing] in a traditional kind of cookie-cutter way where it’s like, ‘Okay, it’s 2023, we’re going to $799 and we’re going to be predictable.’ It’s more of what do we have [in the pipeline], and what can we do that will surprise and delight our customers?”

Apple execs on M2 chips, winning gamers and when to buy a Mac by Matthew Panzarino originally published on TechCrunch

Dutch social enterprise Fairphone, which makes modular and — the claim is — more sustainable and ethical consumer electronics, has nabbed a chunk of funding to continue scaling a circular-economy-aligned smartphone business.

The €49 million (~$53M) “growth capital” investment — from an international consortium of impact investors, led by new shareholders Invest-NL, the ABN AMRO Sustainable Impact Fund and existing investor Quadia via its Regenero Impact Fund — is more than the startup has raised since being founded, back in 2010. (Fairphone had previously raised $40.7M, per Crunchbase — spread across nine funding rounds, drawing on a range of sources from crowdfunding to VC and debt.)

Other existing Fairphone investors DALHAP, DOEN Participaties and PDENH also participated in the new raise — while a number of other investors, including PYMWYMIC and over 1,000 crowdfunders, exited at this point. While Fairphone said it’s using some of the new funding to settle some existing debt.

But the headline claim for the investment is growth.

The European startup is well positioned to capitalize on opportunities flowing from the bloc’s push for a green transition by encouraging a shift to circular business models, with a top-line goal for the European Union to be carbon neutral by 2050.

EU regulators are also eyeing ‘right to repair’ as a priority for mobile devices and other consumer elections — a future requirement which Fariphone is already fulfilling, thanks to its modular, repairable-by-design devices, putting it well ahead of the (waste-generating) industry curve.

Fairphone said the new funding will be used to strengthen its brand positioning — and create further awareness around fairness and sustainability in the electronics industry.

Additionally, it said it wants to accelerate integration of fair and recycled materials into its full product portfolio — saying for example that it will be extending its mining “value chain” programs in Africa & South America, and fair wage programs in Asia.

It will also be funnelling funds into product development and improved customer service — including to keep pushing the envelop on device longevity.

Fairphone recently launched its own-brand wireless earbuds — which contain recycled plastic, Fairtrade gold in the supply chain and an extended battery life vs rival products. We understand the company has also been working on bringing an own-brand pair of repairable and modular over-ear headphones to market.

Commenting on the investment in a statement, Eva Gouwens, Fairphone CEO, said: “Over the past years, Fairphone has been able to transform from a social movement to an impactful mission-driven company. I would like to thank all shareholders who have supported us over the years. With a growing base of mission-aligned investors, we will further raise awareness for fairer electronics and accelerate the growth of our company and impact.”

We’ve asked Fairphone for its latest sales metrics and will update this report with any response.

“We are excited to support Fairphone’s growth ambitions, as a truly circular lighthouse case within the electronics industry,” added Elisabeth Storm de Grave, Principal at Fairphone’s new investor, Invest-NL, in another supporting statement. “With its unparalleled approach to creating ethical products with both people and planet in mind, Fairphone sets new standards for the entire industry. Together, we are disrupting a short-term way of thinking that the world can no longer afford, creating a sustainable and fair future for all stakeholders’”

While Hanna Zwietering, of the ABN AMRO Sustainable Impact Fund, pointed to what she couched as a “growing trend towards conscious consumer behavior” — lauding Fairphone as “a frontrunner in the sustainable electronics industry” she said has “proven it can develop high-quality modular and fair smartphones in most competitive markets”.

In a third supporting statement, Josep Segarra, senior investment manager from Quadia, added: “We are very pleased to further support Fairphone through this significant investment alongside new mission-aligned co-investors. Fairphone perfectly fits in our vision of the sustainable electronics sector, in which we have already supported companies in the refurbished smartphones and home appliances segments. We look forward to continuing to strengthen the uniqueness of the company and aspire to accelerate Fairphone’s growth while creating value for all stakeholders and safeguarding its long-term mission.”

Fairphone nabs $53M in growth capital for ‘sustainable’ consumer electronics by Natasha Lomas originally published on TechCrunch

Monavo Heath turned heads at CES with an Ouroubouros-esque smart ring designed for women.

In the crowded field of fitness wearables, where the mainstream heavy hitter of the Apple Watch heads up a very long tail of typically less pricey and/or more specialist activity tracking bracelets and bands all keen to claim their own patch of data-generating skin, it’s no small irony that differentiation at this point in the market’s run means designing a product to ‘target’ around half the population — as my colleague, TC’s hardware editor Brian Heater, dryly observed of Monavo’s pitch for a smart ring called “Evie” last month.

But what does a wearable made for women actually mean in terms of utility and design? TechCrunch talked to Monavo Health’s CEO and director, John Mastrototaro, to get the inside track on the forthcoming smart ring and delve into its wider roadmap as it works on building a medical devices company whose starting point is simply putting women first.

Monavo is kicking things off, pre-commercial launch, by applying for FDA clearances for two of the metrics the smart ring will track out of the box: Heart rate, and SPO2 (aka blood oxygen level) — and it says it wants the ring to launch with those two regulatory check-marks in place — but with plenty more on the ‘to-do’ slate.

Including — down the line — a goal of adding (non-invasive) blood glucose monitoring into the mix. (Its novel sensing tech remains at a prototype stage for now but Mastrototaro flashed us a look at an integrated RF chip and a wrist-mounted prototype it’s currently testing for this purpose.)

As regards the first iteration of the ‘smart ring for women’ — which will track over a dozen metrics and offer female-focused features like menstrual cycle and mood tracking and support for menopausal symptoms, as well as more regular wearable stuff like activity tracking — Mastrototaro said he’s hoping they’ll be able to launch it in the US around the middle of this year.

The target customers will be women in their 30s and up. While the ring’s price-point will be “well under” $300 (and — refreshingly — there’s no subscription). And that pricing already looks competitive compared to the Oura smart ring — which is currently the main rival for finger-based wearables in the US.

Monavo’s also made some other smart choices to go with a paired down price-tag — including an open design that won’t pinch fingers if they swell a bit; a portable charging case to keep the ring safe and juiced up on the go; and the big strategic decision to apply for regulatory clearances which means the ring can be marketed (differentiated) as a medical device where most others can’t. Which is certainly one way to stand out in a noisy consumer crowd.

Mastrototaro brings a long career in medical device development already, having worked at a number of companies doing clinical research and R&D on sensing technologies — including at Medtronic, where he led the team that developed the first continuous glucose monitor (CGM) sensor for diabetes management.

That’s notable because a lot of startups have been tapping up CGM tech for commercialization in recent years — with the aim of repurposing a medical grade technology for a more general consumer fitness and/or wellness/health use-case. (Including, in the case of India’s Ultrahuman, combining CGM tech with a smart ring to enhance its ability to ‘decode’ the user’s metabolic health.)

Monavo is approaching the same goal — of encouraging more people to watch their blood sugar to help them optimize lifestyle choices and improve their overall health outcomes — but it’s planning to layer that (future) functionality atop a medical devices company foundation, rather than coming at it from a pure ‘wellness’ or ‘fitness’ consumer tech pitch as most of these startups are. Which may lend more credibility to any push it makes here.

Additionally, as noted above, it wants to offer a major twist on the technology side too, as it’s working on developing a non-invasive radio frequency sensor for tracking blood glucose changes.

If it can pull that off it could skate right past the CGM niche and have a shot at opening up a powerful capability to a general consumer who otherwise wouldn’t bother with this kind of health tracking — exactly because it requires sticking sensing filaments (or needles) into actual flesh. Whereas if Monavo’s smart hardware can give you a peek at blood sugar highs and lows via (painless) high frequency radio that implies potential for major, transformative health effects at scale. (Notably Apple has long been rumored to be working on adding non-invasive blood glucose tracking to the Apple Watch, although it’s yet to bring such a tech to market for its general consumer. But the attention on such a feature underscores how much this concept is prized.)

As well as FDA-cleared metrics (assuming Monavo does indeed obtain these clearances) lending credibility to hardware that will — in the first instance — be marketed to highly discerning consumers (i.e. women), the company dressing itself as a medical device maker is smart positioning as it sets the business up to be able to sell hardware into b2b markets too.

Per Mastrototaro, the goal here is to get to a position where, for example, its smart ring could be reimbursable by insurance payers as a preventative health device — so the aim from the start is to scale beyond a direct-to-consumer hardware business.

With demand for healthcare systems continuing to increase, both in the US and beyond, it looks like another smart bet. Certainly it’s not a stretch to imagine overstretched health services may well (also) end up being keen on consumer-friendly medical grade devices — devices they can offer their patients for home monitoring, on so-called ‘virtual wards’, as a cheaper way to free up hospital beds for people who need closer care.

This already partially forming future is what Monavo is positioning its wearable business for.

And, before you ask, it does have men on its roadmap. Mastrototaro says the end-game is to be — simply — a maker of devices for everyone.

But its first task, as it eyes the myriad players ranged on the wearables field — some high gloss, others rather more ragtag — is to find a way to elbow in. And what better way to do that than remember the roughly half of the population most device makers consider a mere afterthought. It ain’t rocket science guys.

Our full Q&A with Movano Health’s CEO & director, John Mastrototaro, follows below. The interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.

TechCrunch: Why do women need a dedicated wearable? So what is your hardware going to be able to track and provide women that other smart rings or wearables can’t?

Mastrototaro: It’s a great question. I mean, first off, our goal as a company is to empower and inspire women to take more active control of their health and to live a happier, healthier, more well balanced life. And the way we’re going to go about doing that is by monitoring a comprehensive set of health metrics: Heart rate, heart rate variability, SPO2, respiration rate, temperature, steps, activity, calories, burned, sleep, sleep stages, and of course, menstrual cycle tracking as well — as well as a couple of other things related to menopause and help in tracking any kinds of symptoms they may have, both through their menstrual cycle as well as when they age and get into the menopause period of life.

One of the things that we found when we started to look at the existing wearables that are on the market today is two things: One, none of them are medical devices — and I’ll talk in a moment about why being a medical device company is really important to us and, we think, important to consumers — and then secondly, that women seem to have been underserved in the wearables market. Most wearables look like they were initially designed for men. They’re kind of thick, bulky, and typically came in male-looking colors — and then subsequently, they’ll change up things a little bit and say, you know, here you go, ladies, here’s the female version.

We spoke to over 1,000 women and asked them what was important to them as they age and related to their health. And we found that, although they want to use wearable products like this, often they don’t [use them] or they only use [them] a part of the time because of some of the shortcomings with the existing devices where they don’t really focus on women’s needs. And so we really focus on what [women] want to see in a health wearable. And one of the things that was very important to them was the accuracy of the data that we provide, as well as helping them understand their body through their cycle, and how every aspect of their health may be affected by that, and also helping them as they age into menopause.

There’s been a survey done that said 92% of women feel unprepared for menopause. And, as we know, 100% of women are going to go through that stage of life. And so we also want to provide resources and help to women as they age — with more than just the health metrics but distilling it down into what it all means to them and their health.

TechCrunch: The question then is how do you do that with this piece of hardware? So are you able to do menstrual tracking, for example, through tracking body temperature? How does the hardware enable you to sort of provide this additional layer of utility to women?

Mastrototaro: Certainly the hardware does provide that utility. And yes, by monitoring their temperature, through the course of the month, as well as their heart rate, we can track and predict when, say, the period is about to start. So that’s certainly one aspect of what we’re doing. But in addition to that, a lot of what we’re going to be doing is asking women about how they feel, and what are their goals for their health — because everyone’s unique, and how people go about getting their activity is unique. Not everyone does 10,000 steps a day… Some people may prefer to swim or they may prefer to cycle. Whatever the case may be. We want to make sure that we’re collecting that data about their activity, and about the calories burned, so they understand that — and also do a lot with correlations.

One thing that’s very important to us is to correlate how one thing may affect another. For example, if a woman experiences headaches at a certain time of the month or she starts to have her first hot flash related to menopause, we want to help explain how maybe activity levels — and the intensity of activity — how much they sleep etc could affect the likelihood of those events. Or things that they could do to try to either reduce the frequency or reduce the severity of events when they occur. So a lot of it has to do with tracking metrics directly. But we also take into account individualized communication between the app and the user.

TechCrunch: Female health historically, as you surely know, has been terribly under studied. So the question then is, okay, you’re going to be acquiring data from the users and hopefully using that to spot these patterns — but can you offer this utility initially? Or is this a sort of a journey for the user that they have to be on with you as you build the data to pick up patterns and figure out correlations?

Mastrototaro: A little bit of both. We are contracting with female medical experts. For example, we’re working with a female doctor who is an expert in women’s sleep. We’re working with a female doctor who’s an expert in menopause. We’re working with female doctors in different disciplines along a woman’s health journey. And so as a woman may be experiencing one of the symptoms or stages of their life, we can provide some expert support, through canned messaging about, here’s why it’s happening, here’s why it’s nothing that you should be concerned about. It’s part of the ageing process. And here’s some tips about how you can manage through this. But as well as doing that initially, you’re right — over time, we’ll be building up a database of all of this for many, many 1,000s of women, that we can mine and leverage that data to help us understand little tricks that may have worked better for one population versus another.

The other thing that we will provide through our app experience is community. Many women have told us that they like to share with one another. And so we will also offer the ability for women to peer-to-peer, communicate and say ‘Hey, I’m having a problem with this. Has anyone experienced that before and any insights you can provide me?’. And then we’ll allow women to speak with one another, to also share. Because this is something that some women told us was important to them.

TechCrunch: So what’s the user experience going to be — talk me through how the user will use and experience the hardware and the app. And also this community element. How will it all fit together?

Mastrototaro: Yeah, that’s a great question. And actually, the three things you just mentioned are the most important pillars for us with the product. So let me start with first about the ring, the design of the ring — even the charging of the ring. Because we did think about women as we did this. So the ring… you can see it’s an open design. That was important to us, because it has a little bit of give. It has a little bit of play in it. And so if your finger happens to swell at a certain time of day, or the month or whatever, it has a little bit of give to it. When we were at CES and many media folks came by… several were wearing an Oura ring as an example. And they wore our ring. And they really liked the way it felt on their finger. And they like the way it looked on their finger. And so there was a lot that went into even the design of the ring itself.

The second thing that was very interesting to [us was] the charging case. The charging case looks like a little compact device. And you slip the ring into it to charge. You can see it’s [in the case] flashing lights now, it’s charging. And so women love the portability of this in that you can slip it in your purse, take it with you on a trip. This charging case will charge the ring 10 times. The ring needs to be charged every three to four days. So if you’re going away for a trip or a couple of weeks, it’s kind of like your AirPods type device. You can just carry this little charger unit with you wherever you go. It will recharge the ring every three to four days when it needs to be recharged. Then this charger obviously can be recharged periodically, by plugging it in an outlet. But in between that time you’ve got the portability — and so a lot of women love that because many of the chargers with wearables you’d have to be plugged in to a power supply in order to recharge the device. And we don’t have that. So those were a couple things related to the hardware that was important [to us].

You asked about the app experience.This app is designed specifically for women. We’ve made it to be much more approachable — with kind of a dashboard with key information for each day. It allows women to do a dive into their body. There’s basically a “my body” primary screen that they can follow through. And we’re trying to have a very holistic and unobtrusive approach to goal setting where they can pick a few goals that they want to achieve. And we can help track that for them. We really are looking at ‘mind body’ with this as well. We will be monitoring mood — and how they’re feeling as well… There’s a strong relationship between how you’re feeling inside and how your body is actually operating. And so that’s very important to us, as well.

And then, lastly, a lot of consumers of wearables today they look at all these trend graphs the current apps provide, and they’re like, is this good or bad? I don’t know what this all means. And so part of what we’re trying to do is distill all that down into insights and help really provide peace of mind to women, and help them understand the general state of their health. And every now and then give them little pearls of wisdom or insight that they can use to take a more active control of their lifestyle.

I’ve talked about the trusted resources of these expert advisors from the medical community, as well as peer to peer community. And so that is the other element of our app experience that we want to provide. So if a woman experiences her very first hot flash with menopause, and we have a very simple way where they can hit little buttons on the screen to denote that they’ve experienced a certain event, we can then feed them information. For example, say hey we understand you’ve just had your first hot flash, here’s why it’s happening, this is normal, it happens to every woman as part of ageing. Here’s exactly why it happened. And here’s a couple of tricks that you could potentially try that may allow you to manage through this or maybe experience fewer events with less severity.

So that’s… what we’re trying to do with three core elements: Focusing the hardware on women, focusing the app and the insights specifically on women and women’s needs. And then, lastly, the community — being a trusted resource. If you go online and look for a solution to a particular problem, there’s thousands of commentaries out there, and much of it is the opposite of one another. It’s like what am I supposed to really do? We want to provide a full, comprehensive, trusted resource for women.

TechCrunch: Could the ring also automatically detect a hot flash? Would you be able to pick up on a temperature change event, say at night — so you could partially automate some of that tracking (vs women needing to manually log each event; instead maybe you could send a push notification asking them to confirm if they had a hot flash at such and such a time)… 

Mastrototaro: You know it’s very interesting because, historically, we’ve not had continuous monitoring of all these metrics that we could then correlate to events that occur. It’s going to be very exciting to look at these things… I’m a 30 year medical device veteran so I’ll give you a little bit of a medical device example. A lot of people have a problem with their heart called atrial fibrillation… when your heart starts to flutter. It’s actually the atria of your heart, that’s the flutter in your heartbeat, goes a little bit crazy. It’s more rapid and not so rhythmic. And one of the things that we can do, just as an example, with that condition is because we’re tracking all their health metrics throughout the day — obviously we’d see in the heart rate when this occurs — but what’s most important to me is many people have this, it just comes and goes periodically. And one of the things that I’m very interested in, and I’m using this as an example but you can think of more, is to track what was happening with their health metrics (or their activity, or their sleep, or other metrics) and then try to correlate it to the initiation of one of these events happening in their life. So that we can help them over time to say, hey, you know what, we’ve noticed that typically, if you have a couple of days where you weren’t very active and you didn’t sleep well, that’s typically when you then have one of these events occur. And so I think we’re going to learn about what are some of the things that caused — not caused but let’s say have some impact on an event occurring or not. And maybe it is, in some ways, the cause.

We can look at the data that happened previous to the event, and try to then help folks over time understand — that, you know, you should avoid really strenuous activity at nighttime that prevents you from sleeping well, and then you have this event in the morning as an example. And so I think there’s going to be a lot of learnings like that — both individualized for a given person, as well as population based — that we’ll be able to better understand that will help folks over time. And I fully believe that we’ll find that hey, you know, on nights when you don’t sleep well, and you didn’t get out much or do this [activity] you’re more prone to having a hot flash. Or if your activity’s too strenuous that’s not good, either… So I’m really excited about what the data can show us over time because no one knows.

TechCrunch: Do you have a sense this smart ring will be a product that’s more popular with older women — such as women who are around perimenopausal age? The pricing has been reported at around $300 — so maybe for younger women it’s a bit more of an outlay for them. But I would guess you do also want younger women as users? So what are the customer profiles you’re targeting?

Mastrototaro: When we went through our process of research, we basically met with 1,000 women between the ages of the young 30s to 70s. So, yeah, we weren’t focused so much on the teens and 20s in what we did. It was really the 30s. So I’d say the latter half of childbearing years and onward is our focus was initially.

We did a full pricing study with women. We were initially thinking about launching this as a pure subscription model. But we spoke to women and the majority said, you know what, I’ve got subscription fatigue; just let me buy the thing and be done with it.

We know that the Oura ring today, which is the primary ring product on the market at this moment, currently sells for $350 to $550, depending on the color of the ring. And in fact, in some ways, I feel women were penalized most — because the ring color that’s most designed specifically for women is rose gold and the rose gold ring is $550. Plus there’s a $6 a month subscription on top of that. So when we looked at what consumers were saying, and our own pricing conjoint analysis, we decided that every ring every color, every size, would be sold at under $300 US to each women. That doesn’t mean $299 — [it’ll be] well under $300 for the ring.

So, on the one hand, we’re going after a medical device claim — and we’re about to be filing, soon this year, for FDA clearance for heart rate and SPO2, because we ran our pivotal FDA trial for that and we’re very excited about the results; we got phenomenal accuracy; our accuracy, and the trial was even better than the hospital grade pulse oximeter, so that was great news for us — so, on the one hand, we’re a medical device, and yet we’re going to provide it to consumers at a lower cost than the non-medical device. And part of the reason for doing that is because we want to try to reach more broadly with this technology and get it in the hands of the people who need it the most, to help them with their health.

[But also] because we’re a medical device company we also have a huge opportunity in the pure healthcare space. Business to business. Major pharmaceutical companies have come to us. Major medical device companies. Integrated healthcare networks have come to us — because they’re looking for a medical device solution that they can use as part of their offering. Big Pharma, for example, they want to use a product like this in clinical trials and post-market surveillance of people on a particular drug where they’re looking to see some of the general metrics associated with their wellness. So we provide them a comprehensive vital signs monitor, and that’s very important. There’s companies that make home oxygenators for people who have pulmonary related problems, COPD, heart failure and COVID-related issues. They’re looking for something to monitor their oxygen levels at home when they’re on an oxygenator. They’ve come to us because we’ve got SPO2 oxygen monitoring that’ll be FDA cleared as part of our solution. So there’s a number of opportunities in the pure healthcare space. And because of that, we can also seek reimbursement for this over time.

And so I hope at some point that there’s people who really need this and, in the US, the payers to cover their constituents that are in their plans. They know who are the high risk populations in the plan — I fully expect that they’ll be putting rings on their fingers, just to even have access to the data to understand the state of their health. But also, I think, to offer discounts on their premiums. As well as even get it on their fingers for free, at some level. And so being a medical device, it allows us those opportunities to seek reimbursement, and certainly partner with health plans and other healthcare related entities. And that’s bearing out today. We’ve got data evaluations going on, in the first quarter of this year, that have been initiated with a major pharmaceutical company, a major medical device company, and an integrated healthcare network organization, who are piloting and using our ring in the first quarter of this year, with the goal of assessing how they can incorporate this into their offering.

TechCrunch: Tell us about what exactly you’re applying for in the FDA application? And when do you hope to have gained these clearances? 

Mastrototaro: The first two metrics we will be seeking FDA clearance for [are] heart rate, and SPO2. They are the first of many — I will also talk about respiration rate, we’ll talk about glucose, blood pressure, if you want. And there’s several other metrics we haven’t talked about yet, that we are doing research on at the moment — But for the first two, it’s heart rate, and SPO2.

Any pulse oximeter also has an FDA clearance for heart rate and SPO2. So it’s a 510K application for that. There is actually a very detailed guidance document from the FDA for devices that are going to measure oxygen, the type of clinical trial that they need to conduct, the level of accuracy that they want to see from the device, the range of oxygen levels that they want the product evaluated over to verify that it’s accurate across a broad range of oxygen. And so that’s all predetermined.

We worked with a hospital in the US, UCSF — University California, San Francisco — where they do a number of these studies. And when they do the study, the participants are wearing our ring, they’re wearing a finger clip, hospital grade system, and then they’re doing monitoring of the subjects — what’s called their arterial blood gas, which is the gold standard or the most accurate measure of oxygen level. That’s what we get compared to: This arterial blood gas measurement.

We had an accuracy of 2.1% error on average — and the FDA requirement is you need within 4%. So we were well within the FDA guidance of accuracy. And one of the important things as a side note to that is we have to evaluate it over a wide range of skin tones for people — from fair skinned to very dark skinned people — and we were accurate independent of their skin tone which was a really important outcome for us. And actually, it is more accurate in people of color than a lot of what’s been written recently about how the pulse oximeter and similar stuff worked for people of color. So that was a really great outcome for us as well.

So, for the FDA to get clearance, you have to file this as a 510K. We will be doing it sometime this first part of the year — where not only do you need the clinical evidence, which is the really most important piece, but you need all this other information for the FDA — hundreds of documents, and tasks and reports, etc — as part of the 510K filing. So we’re working on putting the entire package together, right now.

Once we file it, I expect to obtain clearance within three to four months. The last couple of 510Ks I did with a prior company, which was also post-COVID starting, one took 90 days and one took 108 days — so I’m hopeful that in three to four months we could get a clearance from the time that we file.

We could launch the product as a wellness device if we’re ready to go before the clearance. But, at this point, it looks like the timing of the clearance and when we’re ready to launch is going to come together quite nicely — and we’ll launch it as a medical device at that point.

TechCrunch: Another aspect that’s important to consider here is how women’s reproductive health has become hugely politicized in the US. Which means there’s a real concern around user privacy and the broader security of women’s data. So how are you going to ensure that women — your users — can feel comfortable using a device that tracks so many personal metrics and does things like keeping tabs on their menstrual cycle and could be used to try to infer additional sensitive health information about them. This is a really complicated problem now for a lot of health companies operating in the US…

Mastrototaro: It is. And I’m glad you’ve raised the question. It’s another one of the advantages of being a medical device company. So, obviously, the FDA has a lot of regulations around medical devices and the privacy of people’s personal health information and HIPAA guidelines and standards for assuring that the data is secure. And so because we’re a medical device company, we have to do that by design.

As it relates to the Roe versus Wade decision in the US, women can rest assured that their data will not be shared with anyone unless they give us the authorization to do so — if they want to share a summary report of their data with their doctor because they’re going in for their annual visit, we can do that. But we will only do it with their authorization. And the FDA mandates that we have to protect the privacy of women’s data. And so I think women will trust it, because we’re a medical device company. And because we have to do it by design. It’s part of the FDA clearance process.

Today, there’s new regulations now related to cybersecurity assessment of your file database. You have to have that. That’s part of our FDA filing, when we put this in. We have to have our cybersecurity policy and testing that’s been done by a third party to show that we’ve done penetration testing and are doing what is up to industry standards to assure that we’re protecting people’s personal health information. And so we believe, because we’re a medical device company and because we have to do that as part of being a medical device company and a medical entity, that women can trust that their data is secure with us.

TechCrunch: But what about if you were to get a subpoena or legal order, say from a US state prosecutor or law enforcement, to provide user data — you can’t necessarily say no to that…

Mastrototaro: I believe when that happens we won’t be the first people they go after. They’re gonna go after the doctor or the office that’s directly treating them or that did whatever procedure may be that they may have conducted, or who prescribed the medication and the pills that they may have taken… They’re going to go after them first. And we would probably be third or fourth in line.

But look, if we’re legally obligated to do something, this is something where our attorneys would get involved at that point. And we’d have to make an assessment of what we have to do versus not. But we wouldn’t be the first folks they go after, quite frankly. It would be others before they get to us.

But it is something that we have talked about. And something that is very important to us. We have added many women in our leadership roles in a number of ways, both in terms of our strategy, of how to develop the product, in terms of our marketing to women, and gathering and research from women. Even our board of directors has two women — of the four external [directors], one who’s got a 30 year career in digital health and was at WebMD. She actually led the development of the symptom checker at WebMD… So we’ve got some experts, both related to female health, as well as even in the legal space to help us with exactly how we would address these issues. So I would say that it’s much more top of mind for us, because we are female-focused and because we are a medical device company.

TechCrunch: But there could be a way to build this kind of a product where all of the data is locally processed and stays locally on the users’ own devices — and therefore in a way where you would not hold any of it so could not be forced to disclose any user data…

Mastrototaro: It would if you did that. The only challenge there, of course, as you know, as we spent a lot of time earlier talking about the data and tracking longitudinally what’s happening over time and by looking at population-level correlations we can help understand how to improve everyone’s health and learn what may effect what — the cause and effect. And so it would prohibit us from being able to do that. And, quite frankly, it would also prohibit us from improving the product.

As we collect data over time, we’re able to look at the data were collecting and understand better what we can do to improve upon it. So you’re right, that would be one way to literally not have the data that they were going to ask for — but then you don’t see it perform.

When we get it [user data], we do de-identify it for the purposes that we use. And so maybe there’s a firewall related to [certain types of requests for data]. And we certainly look at those types of opportunities to see what we can do to give women peace of mind. But I can tell you, at least at this juncture in the conversations we’ve had with women, the fact that we’re a medical device company, the fact that we have privacy standards and protocols, and all the rest, has been very important to them, and seems to give them peace of mind to know that their data will be protected.

TechCrunch: Your consumer business model is to sell hardware — you’re not intending to generate revenue from a recurring subscription, as you mentioned. But some people might worry if there’s no subscription there’s no recurring revenue and maybe you’re going to need to monetize by selling the data or something? But that’s not what’s going on here, is it? You’re only going to use the data for product development and for research related to these potential correlations with implications for women’s health, and not for — I don’t know — handing to Facebook to target ads etc…

Mastrototaro: No, no, no, we can’t do that with what we’re collecting. That is not part of what we can do. We can’t personally identify anyone and target them with the data that we’re collecting. We can only use the de-identified data for our purposes of developing algorithms and whatnot. And so we can’t — we won’t and can’t — do any targeted advertising or those types of things. With any woman that is not how a medical device company would operate. That has not always been the case with consumer entities but as a med device company, we would be in violation of many regulations if we did that.

I would say that one of the most important reasons why we want to have access to the data — especially longitudinal data in the cloud — is to really track trends in a woman’s health over time. We want to understand if their health is improving, stable, getting a little worse.

For example, if a woman starts to exercise more actively, and we’re monitoring that, we may find that a resting heart rate starts to go down. We can actually correlate that lowering of the resting heart rate to maybe a reduction in their risk of getting Type Two diabetes or high blood pressure, as an example.

And so we want to point those things out to women. You know, a lot of women, they exercise because they believe that it helps them burn calories and keeps their weight down. But guess what, we’re likely going to show women that if they are exercising appropriately, they’re actually sleeping better on nights following days of exercise. And as they exercise more, their resting heart rate goes down, their risk of high blood pressure goes down, their risk of diabetes goes down, their heart rate variability goes up, which means their body’s in a better metabolic state. And so we can point out from their own data, how their health may be improving, or worsening. And if a woman starts to maybe have a mental health related issue or mood related issue, because we’re seeing changes in her activity, or sleep patterns, or a resting heart rate, we may just simply ask a woman how they’re feeling. How are they doing? We want to correlate their mental wellness, as well, to the data that we’re seeing — and even try to detect when there might be something going on in that capacity. And so really having access to this data, and looking at it over time, allows us to have a better experience for each women who’s using the platform.

TechCrunch: When will the ring launch? And what about its positioning vs mainstream health wearables which are already popular with women — like the Apple Watch?

Mastrototaro: We’re looking around mid year-ish timeframe [to launch the ring in the US]. We’ve started to have more marketing materials go out. We’ve sent out a couple of newsletters — we had a recent one focused on women talking about women’s sleep — so we’re starting to get some marketing materials out into the space to understand the level of interest.

In the US, there are so many women who have written us and told us a little bit of their life story and told us about how they’re very thankful that someone’s finally developing something for specifically for them. They’ve worn Apple watches and other products. Apple Watch is phenomenal, it does everything. But that’s also its curse, because the fact that it does everything, you gotta recharge it every day.

And, actually, all of our core baseline metrics, we monitor at night when you’re sleeping. Because you’re in the same state night after night after night. So we can compare apples to apples, when we look at longitudinal trends. [Whereas] an Apple Watch is typically bedside — being charged every night. And many women have told us they can’t wear the Apple Watch to bed, it just gets in the way on their wrist.

We’ve also heard from a lot of women who said they like wearing their Apple Watch sometimes, and they’ll have that, but they would still buy a ring for their health related data — and use the Apple Watch for all the other stuff. So it’s interesting.

[A lot of women also told us] they really like something that is very unobtrusive and something that looks good on their finger. Over time, we may change the look of it a little bit — but we want it to be something that’s appealing to a woman where she likes wearing it as if it’s a piece of jewelry, never mind that it’s providing all this health related information at the same time. That’s important to them.

TechCrunch: Men are going to be pretty jealous, aren’t they?

Mastrototaro: Well, our goal with this product is eventually we will serve everyone. But we felt like where other products seem to make the initial design for men — and women were an afterthought — in our case, we’re going to make men the afterthought and focus on women up front and really make the product for them.

Now there will be men who wear this product for sure. They won’t probably use the menstrual cycle tracking feature. But certainly the other [features] are all applicable and the app will fulfil the needs of a man — but it is truly designed with a woman in mind based upon the input that we received from over 1,000 women.

TechCrunch: You’re going to launch it in the US. Is this a product you’re looking to launch outside the US in time, too? Or will you remain very much focused on the domestic market?

Mastrototaro: We’ve had a lot of conversations about that. Certainly, in my medical device experience and background at Medtronic — a very large med device company — we launched products all over the globe. And in this case, we do want to get beyond the US. To be quite frank, there’s certain markets that are English speaking, where it’s easier for us to launch a product that we have almost exactly as it is.

When you get into Europe, now with the new medical device directives, there as a med device you’ve got to translate into 24 languages, no matter what countries you want to launch in. And there’s a lot of new challenges for certain medical device companies. So, for us, we’ve got to assess the challenges of getting into those markets — or whether or not we launched it as a medical device in certain markets. We could always launch it as a ‘medical grade’ device or a wellness device. Yet it really is the medical side — we do have that opportunity to do that. So those are some of the things we’ll have to explore. But yeah, over time, we see we see this as a product where there’s a global need, quite frankly.

Everywhere the rates of diabetes and high blood pressure and other chronic conditions have been rising year after year. And, and I mean, we have a very grand mission of playing a small part in helping level that off and help bring it down over time by really helping people take more active control over their health and understand subtle changes they can make to avoid getting — or certainly delaying — getting diabetes and high blood pressure and other chronic conditions that develop as one ages. So we’re really excited about that opportunity. There’s a real need. And we think we can we can play a role in helping women to lead a healthier and more well balanced life — and then later on do the same for everyone.

TechCrunch: Tell us a bit more about what else you’re developing — including for monitoring blood glucose non-invasively… 

Mastrototaro: We have our own proprietary technology that we’re developing to use radio frequency [RF] to monitor blood pressure and glucose non-invasively. I spent most of my career developing the first continuous glucose monitoring system that was cleared by the FDA for people with diabetes back in 1999. I actually led the team that developed [that]. And I led the integration of that with an insulin pump and all these other things for people with diabetes.

But we now have this one little chip on this board — the chip is four millimeters by 6.7 millimeters — we could even put it in a ring if we wanted. But right now we’re using it in [a wrist-mounted prototype] band. We’re evaluating this RF. We’ve already run some clinical trials with bigger pieces of the system in the past — where it was much larger — but we developed our own integrated circuit chip. And we’re about to start our next round of blood pressure and glucose studies using that chip.

And then, beyond what we’re doing for that, there are three or four other female-related metrics that we’re not talking about at this point. But that we’re really interested in making the measurement of that will also help provide a more comprehensive look at at a woman’s health. So [we’re] very excited about our pipeline with other measures. And so — over the course of the next three to five years — I would hope to have somewhere between five and 10 different metrics or diagnoses that are all FDA cleared as part of the one device.

Another one we have mentioned are sleep disorders. So naturally, because overnight, we can monitor your heart rate, your oxygen levels, your breathing rate, etc — if you have a particular sleep disturbance, we may be able to diagnose that and we’ll be doing clinical trials this year to look at the accuracy of our device at detecting some of the sleep disorders.

TechCrunch: Current-gen CGMs for monitoring blood glucose are semi invasive — but what you’re saying is you’ve developed a prototype that’s able to track glucose through the skin without any kind of invasive filament? Such a technology would of course be hugely revolutionary. Many people have been trying to do that for years… 

Mastrototaro: As I said, I led the first minimally invasive CGM to get cleared in ’99. And I was in the space for about 25 years working on that. And so I saw a lot of companies come to us with different optical and other non-invasive techniques to try to measure glucose. It is not easy. That is an absolute.

The RF technology we’re using — and we’ve got asset protection on all of this as well — it is up at these really high frequencies and we are able to see, and we show this on the bench and we’ve seen it in some people with Type One diabetes, where we’re tracking the changes in their glucose levels [when] say they eat food or take their insulin — and, to be perfectly frank, in some people we get really nice tracking and others we don’t at this point.

We’ve used different systems before. They’re noisier. You have to have temperature control — like fans blowing on it to keep it cool. So this will be the first studies coming up where we have it all on this one chip. And by integrating it all together in one chip, we know already that we have higher fidelity signals. And then the question is can we get the data accurate enough?

The other thing I would say is that when the first CGM came out, their average errors were in the 20-plus percent range. And over 15 years, the sensors have gotten like below 10% average errors. And so they’ve improved over time. And they’re used primarily in people with Type One diabetes on insulin. Or maybe some people with Type Two who are also on insulin and intensively managed. We’re really focused on people with pre-diabetes, or Type Two diabetes on oral medications, to really help them understand how their lifestyle affects their glucose levels. And so I’m really looking for the ability to monitor trends in glucose levels over time.

For example, if we see a big excursion at one time of the day, maybe after a particular meal, we want to inform them of, hey, you know, not sure what you ate today at lunch, but try to avoid that particular thing, right, it’s not so great for your glucose. Or help them try to understand how if they get a little bit of activity through the day, when they eat some of their meals, they have much better glucose control than if they don’t, and how important even just getting out for a 10 or 15 minute walk could be to do this. So we’re thinking about those types of applications. Because these people aren’t on insulin. Even if you told them they had a high blood sugar they don’t know what to do with it — what it means to them. It’s not like they’re going to take another dose of their medication… So we want to be more informative — to help them understand how they can make very subtle changes in their lifestyle, whether it’s in the food they eat, or it’s a little bit about their activity, that can have a dramatic effect on keeping their blood sugar’s more normalized over time. And that’s that’s where we really want to go with this.

We’ll leave the CGMs, like I developed and the other ones related to Type One and insulin using people, where they need the numbers day in and day out and moment in and moment out. Because they may be dosing insulin or consuming something to correct the glucose level that they have. But for Type Two diabetes or prediabetes, which is the lion’s share of the market — you know, 90-plus percent of people are in those categories — that’s where we want to focus our energies to start.

TechCrunch: And is the idea, ultimately, that your RF blood glucose tech could be compact enough to also fit on a ring? Or is this going to be a separate device?

Mastrototaro: We could either do it on the ring — the chip is small enough that it can fit in the ring. Most of our studies today, though, are done on the wrist. In fact, you can see I’m holding this [wrist-mounted prototype] device — so we would put this on the wrist. And we would use this for blood pressure and glucose monitoring. That’s where we’re going to start. And we will be using this in clinical trials shortly. This device, not only does it make the RF measurement… but it also has multiple optical sensors for the heart rate, SPO2, it’s got temperature sensing. Everything’s in this device. And so we’re gearing up for the studies right now.

TechCrunch: So you’re going to be a medical device company with multiple devices — and/or increasingly multifunctional medical devices?

Mastrototaro: Yeah, that’s correct. You know, it’s like, certain big diagnostic systems in the hospitals monitor multiple analytes and measures? Well, we will be monitoring multiple measures with our device over time. With this [smart ring] right now, today, it’s going to have heart rate and SPO2. In the future we’ll turn on — well, respiration rates we’re monitoring but we won’t be filing for that one right out the gate. But that’s next. As well as then sleep disturbances. So the ring itself, in the first embodiment, can do four or five of the measures that we want to make. But then once we include the RF chip, and some of the others that we’ve got — actually, there’s another couple of chips in here that we’re not using yet for some of the other metrics I can’t talk about yet — but we’re able to collect data for those as well. So it’s very exciting. Because, over time, we feel like we can provide a real comprehensive view of one’s vital signs and their overall health with one device that they’re wearing in a very unobtrusive way.

Put a (smart) ring on it: Monavo on why its health wearable will put women first by Natasha Lomas originally published on TechCrunch

I have wanted a robot pet at least since Sony introduced the original Aibo in 1999 – probably earlier, but Aibo made it seem tangible. Since the, there’s been a steady stream of attempts at making robot pets a reality that matches what we often see in futuristic science fiction – including a recent Aibo reboot, Pleo the animatronic pet dinosaur, Furby, Jibo, Anki’s Cosmo and many more. Loona the Petbot threw its hat into the ring via Kickstarter late last year, and based on some very impressive demo videos, this looked like the actual achievement of a Pixar character come to life.

Loona is actually shipping out to some of its earliest backers, with April set as the timeframe for current orders made via Indiegogo, and KEYI, the company behind it, was demoing the adorable little bot at CES earlier this month. The company also sent a Loona my way at the time, and I’ve been testing/developing a deep emotional bond with this bundle of electronics and ABS plastic ever since.

The basics

At heart, Loona is a four-wheeled image recognition and robotics tech demonstration in a surprisingly affordable package. The asking price right now on Indiegogo via its “indemand” pre-order arrangement is $359 for a package that includes some accessories, which is a discount from the planned $500 retail asking price.

With its debut crowdfunding campaign video and GIFs, Loona aimed to hit would-be buyers right in their adorableness glands, showing a robot that manages to exude charm and personality through expert combination of animated eyes on its display ‘face,’ articulating ears with glowing tips, and two arm/leg combos with a wheel at either end that can propel it forward and help it make hand or paw gestures.

Loona the Petbot

Image Credits: TC / Darrell Etherington

The screen face is bright and high-resolution, and the camera array that powers Loona’s recognition capabilities rests just below that, on what we might as well call a ‘chin’ since we’re well down the anthropomorphization road at this point. The robot also has touch sensors for interaction purposes, including a pat-able top of head.

There’s a mic onboard as well as speakers, so that Loona can hear its owner and also respond (though strictly non-verbally). When you set Loona up using the companion smartphone app, it allows you to set your voice recognition language and provides you with a range of prompts that the robot is pre-programmed to respond to so you can test them out.

Design

Loona’s core strength lies in its industrial design, which blends a retro-futuristic sci-fi robotics aesthetic (which is very evocative of WALL-E’s EVE, imo) with a hyper-efficient approach to mechanical engineering that nonetheless allows the robot to express a wide range of possible emotions and communicate fairly expressively. The outer ABS plastic shell and rubber-tracked wheels also all feel durable, which is good for a robot that’s going to spend a lot of time bumping into things and potentially getting harassed by real live animal pets, and/or human children.

There’s one noteworthy exception to this, which is clearly indicated on Loona out of the box: The robot’s ears are particularly susceptible to damage if yanked around too much, which makes sense given that they have built-in motors and probably feature the lightest-weight connectors of the whole thing. In other words, Loona’s ears are its Achilles heels, which is probably why they were the first thing my dog tried to (gently) chew on. But if you can keep treatment of those relatively light, there’s no reason to expect Loona can’t survive bumps, scrapes and even the occasional fall.

A great deal of Loona’s flexible mobility and expressiveness comes from one key element of the robot’s design: Its four wheels attach via a single axis located in the middle of its body. This allows Loona to do things like turn on a dime, raise its ‘paw,’ lift and lower its head and much more, all in a relatively simple mechanical package that avoids introducing multiple points of potential failure and a lot more complexity on the movement programming side.

All-in-all, Loona combines some incredible ingenuity in terms of its design to significantly lower costs while also introducing the charm and visual appeal of far more complicated robotic pets.

Performance

Loona’s physical design may be a masterclass in making the most of smart constraints, but the robot’s programming, performance and interactivity behavior is an abject example of overpromising and underdelivering. When the crowdfunding campaign first debuted, we made sure to check that the videos were real footage and not renders, and while the company says they are, using Loona in practice reveals that those shots must be carefully shot, selected and edited to convey the level of sentience that they manage to communicate.

In really, Loona has lots of charisma and is indeed a technical achievement in terms of its movements and mannerisms, but using it is less like living in a Pixar movie, and more like having a Roomba that also coos at you.

I will say that I really like the setup and first-run experience, which provides a needlessly overwrought, but fun origin myth for Loona. A short animation implies that your robot is animated by some kind of seed spirit made by a rock monster – a seed spirit that of course has a super adorable bubble butt, as is de rigeur now for cutesy animated characters. The spirit travels through a portal and appears inside your Loona, animating its screen and adding new meaning to the old ‘toys-to-life’ product category.

Loona's spirit comes from this seed thing with a bubble butt

Loona’s mythos includes this sweet dumper. Image Credits: Loona

Once it’s been connected to your Wifi network and imbued with the spark of life, the Loona app takes you through some demos of its capabilities, including face recognition (and marking you as its owner) and then some basic voice commands. This is where the experience went from magical to muddling: During the initial face setup Loona lost sight of me and just spun forlornly in a circle making somewhat plaintive whimpering noises while trying to find me again. Quitting and restarting the app fixed this, but then moving on to the audio commands, I had a hard time first figuring out how to tell when Loona was in listening mode after saying its wake word (“Loona,” unsurprisingly) and then it would hear the actual command and translate it into action at best half the time.

Overall, this is where Loona really falls short of its promise – the vision system seems to work only some of the time, despite my attempts to lower or raise myself to optimize its line-of-sight. Similarly, trying to get it to engage with two toys provided by the company, including a ‘fold-it-yourself’ cardboard ball and a red fabric bullfighting cape, worked only some of the time (not at all for the cape). When it does work, it is indeed delightful, as when it found the ball and approached it, trying to bat it around with its arms. But it was at best hit-or-miss for both visual and audio input in my use.

Loona offers a lot of other interactivity options, including direct remote control with the app’s virtual controller, which is fun and a good way to ensure you get a lot of value out of this when playing with it with kids. There’s also a programming tool that allows you to run Loona through fully custom routines and sequences, which is also fun and educational as an activity with children.

The robot is also effortlessly charming when just left on and to its own devices, as it wanders around, cooing, discovering random things, occasionally getting stuck on furniture (it’s supposed to have object avoidance to not do this) and generally seems intent on amusing itself. This behavior is when it is perhaps most pet-like, inscrutable and adorable in its pursuit of god knows what.

Bottom line

Given how impressive its launch visuals were, there was no real chance that Loona could live up to expectations. But the robot also fails to live up to its most basic promises when it comes to sound and image recognition, which is a much harder pill to swallow. That said, when it does work, it actually does provide a genuinely delightful and impressive performance, and it seems like its creators are taking an iterative approach to improving the platform via software updates and more.

Loona the Petbot

Image Credits: TC / Darrell Etherington

I want to be clear: Loona is fun, especially for kids, but it can also be frustratingly rough around the edges. That said, its planned retail pricing of $500 does massively undercut something like the Aibo. It’s still a decent chunk of money to spend – about the same as an entry-level iPad, which is far more capable, but far less cute.

Like me, Loona the Petbot is dumb but lovable by Darrell Etherington originally published on TechCrunch

With the economy teetering on recession, and sales of mobile phones and other consumer electronics slowing right down globally, a U.K. startup called Raylo that’s leaning into both of those themes has picked up £110 million ($136 million) to grow its business, offering consumers access to new gadgets by way of short-term leases.

The London-based company currently operates in the U.K. selling monthly subscriptions for phones, tablets and laptops, and it plans to use the funding both to expand that list to a wider range of gadgets like e-bikes, as well as to continue investing in its tech, which includes an AI-based platform to assess risk for each sale, recommendation tech, and a platform called “Raylo Pay” that is embedded by third-party merchants for Raylo to power leasing services for them.

The circular aspect of its sales model, the company said, is also the basis of another development at the business: Raylo said it now has “B Corp” status — which signifies that as a for-profit company, Raylo also is operating with a view to making “a material positive impact on society and the environment through their operations,” as laid out by the B Corp organization.

Notably, this funding is coming mainly in the form of debt, with a portion as equity, although CEO and co-founder Karl Gilbert would not disclose the exact amount. NatWest and Quilam Capital are providing that debt, with unnamed previous backers providing equity. (Existing investors include Telefonica, Guy Johnson of Carphone Warehouse fame, Octopus Ventures, Macquarie Capital and others.)

This is a significant injection of financing for Raylo: prior to now, it had raised only about £12 million in equity, including $11.5 million in 2021, and about £30 million in debt. Raising debt at the moment is significantly easier than equity-based for many startups that are generating cash: they are using the funding as they might a more traditional raise but without giving up a stake in the company, nor facing negative pressure on their valuations as a result of doing that.

“This round transforms our finance infrastructure so that we don’t need a lot of equity going forward,” Gilbert said, adding that the round “is designed for us to hit profitability.”

Raylo has been growing at a fast clip, with its subscriber base doubling in the last year and Gilbert noting it’s on track to double again this year, and Raylo Pay growing 10x in the last six months to a “£3 billion opportunity.”

The actual numbers of users and revenues are not being shared but it appears that the activity off Raylo’s platform is the big prospect: Gilbert describes his company not as an e-commerce platform, but a “fintech” because of the roles that Raylo Tech and the other technology play, and how all of that aligns the startup more closely with neo-banks and other financial services startups using personalization, AI and related tools to better target their services — which in turn are built not for acquiring goods as such, but for helping people to manage their money better.

All the same, as far as consumers are concerned, the crux of Raylo’s business, and what it is built on, is the idea that people want the latest gadgets — be they phones and laptops, or VR headsets and e-bikes — but most do not have the disposable income to buy outright all of the items they’d like to have. And so it’s created a platform to cater to this, offering shorter-term ownership of those gadgets for a lower price.

The per-month rate goes down depending on the length of the lease, but currently the cheapest models are leased at £7.31/month, tablets at £10.72 and laptops at £17.92. Gilbert tells us that while customers are given the possibility of buying the equipment, most do not.

The average loan is 19 months, from a stock pool that is typically 60% brand new and 40% certified refurbishments, Gilbert said. Very few opt to buy products at the termination of those leases.

“The proposition is designed for pure rental,” Gilbert added. Between 5-10% contact the company to keep merchandise for good, but “it’s rare that consumers want to own the product at the end.”

There are, and have been, a number of other players in the circular economy landscape. Some like Grover (which also focuses on gadgets and “leases”), BackMarket (refurbished gadgets), and Vinted (clothes) have scaled up over the years, with lots of funding, big valuations and many customers. Others like Lumoid have found it hard to get the right kind of traction to stick around.

In that context, Raylo is taking an interesting approach by focusing on its technology and services for third-party platforms.

“Renting” phones is not particularly a new concept: this is effectively what mobile carriers offering handset subsidies were doing for years when they “sold” phones on two-year plans with the idea being that in theory a user would trade it in or return it at the end of that contract.

That model has proven to be a challenging one for carriers, who in years past had the double whammy of analysts slamming them for carrying heavy sums on their balance sheets as handset subsidies, and consumers gravitating away from these to SIM-only plans to have more flexibility (and churn-ability) in the long run. Carriers however still may want to offer these options, which is where a company like Raylo can step in to provide both the lease and the management of that lease. (Notable that mobile behemoth Telefonica is one of the startup’s key backers.)

Needless to say, that model has cataclysmically backfired for some. A startup called Fair, heavily bankrolled by SoftBank, once took on Uber’s car leasing business when Uber found it to be too much of an operational and financial burden on its business. The logic was that an independent company could do a much better job managing and growing that business. Alas, it was not to be and Fair did not fare very well, either.

Gadgets are much, figuratively speaking, faster-moving — not to mention cheaper — than cars and so a business offering outsourced financing for gadget leases, as Raylo is doing, may well prove to have a better shot at success, meeting with a market of merchants that might not want to handle that kind of business themselves but have that option for customers who need it.

“We may have started with our own channel, but we see ourselves as a platform that enables others’ distribution of their brands,” Gilbert said. “It’s like a new category of BNPL, offering crucial affordability channels, not to mention helping with sustainability commitments, for those brands. from OEMs.”

The focus on sustainability motivating Raylo’s backers, it seems.

“We are delighted to have been able to support Raylo’s future growth ambitions with this new financing facility. The business’ commitment to changing the way consumer electronics are sold and enjoyed is extremely well aligned with NatWest’s ESG objectives and passion for innovation and disruptive technologies.” said Milena Sheahan, senior director at NatWest, in a statement. “Raylo are a progressive, forward thinking business, with a solid platform to positively influence consumer behaviour and attitude towards use of technology in the future. We are proud to have Rayo join us as a valued client within NatWest’s Speciality Finance customer franchise.”

Raylo raises $136M to build out its gadget lease-and-reuse ‘fintech’ platform by Ingrid Lunden originally published on TechCrunch

Nobody is going to accuse Angry Miao of making boring keyboards (or earbuds). The company’s previous releases, The Cyberboard, Am Hatsu and Am AFA, are as overengineered as they are unique. When the company first started teasing its new 60% board, it almost looked too conventional to be an Angry Miao product, but keeping with tradition, there’s a twist here.

See, the AM 65 Less: AM Compact Touch is a wired and Bluetooth-enabled 60% keyboard with an HHKB layout — which means there are no function keys, no numpad and, as is standard for this layout, no arrow keys. Typically, keyboard enthusiasts then put those arrow keys on a separate layer, accessed through a key combo. As you can imagine, that can be a bit of a hassle, especially if you write a lot. But having their hearts set on this layout, the Angry Miao designers decided that instead of keyboard shortcuts, they could put a small touch panel on the front of the case. The argument here is that this offers the advantages of a small 60% keyboard and symmetric HHKB layout, while still featuring arrow key functions. Did I mention Angry Miao really likes to overengineer its products?

Image Credits: TechCrunch

Originally, the company had called the board the ‘AM 65 Less,’ but that caused a bit of confusion in the community, given that it’s not really a 65% keyboard either. The official name is now the AM 65 Less: Am Compact Touch.

Angry Miao sent me a review unit in the Famicon-inspired ‘8-Bit’ colorway last month (there are seven variants in total) and I’ve been using it almost exclusively ever since.

Despite the touch panel, this is the company’s most conventional keyboard yet. It features a hotswap PCB, so you can easily change the switches if you want to, south-facing RGB lighting, and with the exception of the high front, it looks pretty normal for a small keyboard.

Image Credits: TechCrunch

Let’s talk about the touch panel first, since it’s surely the most controversial aspect of the board. It works just as described and it does what it does well, but arrow keys remain infinitely more convenient. The promise here is that you won’t have to move your wrists as much because your thumbs can handle moving the cursor, since it’s already aligned with the touchpad. In reality, you’re likely going to move your hands more, because you’ll use your mouse more. For fixing the kinds of typos you catch while writing a word, it’s easy enough to go back a few letters. For anything more, which you can do by keeping your finger on the touchpad, it becomes a bit of a guessing game whether you’ll be able to time things right to stop the cursor where you need to. I ended up putting the cursor keys on a layer, but that kind of defeats the purpose of the touchpad, of course. Your mileage may vary.

The fact that the touchpad is at the front of the board also means you can’t really use a wrist wrest, something that’s exasperated by the fact that the board sits at a non-changeable 10-degree angle. I ended up putting a wrist rest a few inches away from the board, leaving enough space to still use the touchpad, though I never found the high angle to be a problem. The company recommends a split wrist wrest for users who want to use one.

Like all Angry Miao products, this one is unapologetically not for everyone. The fact that it feels and sounds fantastic makes up for its quirks, but I can’t help but wonder what an Angry Miao 65% board with arrow keys would be like.

One of Angry Miao’s latest innovations is its adjustable leaf spring that lets you change the flex of the PCT and hence the typing experience from very hard to soft. Currently, most other keyboards use a gasket design and very flexible PCBs to allow for a softer typing experience. If done right, that usually works, but in many of the keyboards I’ve recently tested, it didn’t seem to make all that much of a difference. Here, you can really feel the difference between the various settings (though it does take a bit of work to open up the board and make those changes to the springs).

In addition to the different springs, the board also comes with all of the necessary tools to change them out, as well as a very nice screwdriver, an additional bottom foam mat, cleaning cloth, replacement cables and screws. There is no carrying case. Instead, Angry Miao opted for a soft carrying pouch.

The build quality here is impeccable. The company says the CNC milling of the aluminum case alone takes almost 6 hours, with the case then being sandblasted and painted afterwards (with all of the colorways using two colors: one for the part of the case up to the top of the first row of keys and another for the rest). Mechanical keyboard fans are nothing if not persnickety, but I think they are going to have a hard time finding fault with the execution here, be it the rounded corners, the painting or even the finishing on the inside of the board.

You open the board from the top, which is a bit unusual, but it also makes it pretty easy to take it apart. Once inside, there are a few more connectors than you are probably used to — in part because of the battery and Bluetooth module. It’s also easy to see why the board sounds good. Not only is there plenty of foam, but also a nice copper weight (the whole keyboard weighs in at about 3.3 pounds). Add the battery and the result is a board with very little room to sound hollow. There is also no rattle from the screw-in stabilizers.

If you own one of Angry Miao’s Cybermat charging mats, you’ll be able to wirelessly charge the AM 65 Less with that, too.

The switches that come with the bundle version are Angry Miao’s Icy Silver switches. These are premium transparent linear switches, manufactured by TTC, with dual-stage springs and an initial force of 45 grams. There’s very little stem wobble here and they are very smooth, though one thing worth noting is that as I took off the keycaps, the switches often came out of the PCB with them. That’s not been a problem in daily usage, but worth mentioning nonetheless.

The result of all of this is a keyboard that is a joy to type on. Every key press sounds like two pool balls hitting each other, which is what I personally look for.

Like all Angry Miao products, the 65 Less doesn’t come cheap, though while high, the price isn’t completely outrageous in the world of higher-end mechanical keyboards. The standard base kit, without switches and keycaps will retail for $398, the bundle with switches and keycaps that match the variant you choose will cost $498.

Given that the likes of Keychron barely charge $20 more to go from a barebones kit to a fully assembled one, that’s quite a difference, but a lot of these are custom designs and the company sells its switches for about $1 each.

We’re also talking about some thick, high-quality keycaps — at least on the 8-Bit version I tested. For this version, the company is using the Cherry-profile JTK Classic FC keycaps, inspired by the Nintendo Famicom of the 80s, which, best I can tell, were first available in a group buy in 2020 and now available in stock at a number of vendors. These are triple-shot ABS keycaps with latin and hiragana legends that feature a mix of the original base kit and its novelties. Other variants feature keycaps the company created in collaboration with the likes of Domikey and others.

Image Credits: Angry Miao

While I haven’t tested these, there are also two special editions. For $450 for the base kit and $550 for the bundle, the Laser kit features LED light elements on the front left and right (inspired by Tesla’s Cybertruck, the company says). The Mech Love version, at $515 and $615, features customizable LED elements in the open spaces next to the first row and personalizable engravings on the back. It looks like the company may later make these additional LED modules available as add-ons, too.

Whether these boards are worth that is going to be in the eye of the beholder. The fact that Angry Miao is launching all of these variations must mean that the company believes it’ll see a fair number of orders. It’s definitely the company’s most approachable product yet and while the prices may seem eyewatering, they are within the ballgame for higher-end custom keyboards, where they keycaps themselves can often cost $150 or more. Like with so many “hobbies,” at some point, you are paying a lot more for incremental improvements. Whether you want to own a keyboard that costs as much as a laptop is something you have to decide for yourself. It’s definitely the closest we’ve seen Angry Miao come to building a straight-up everyday keyboard.

The pre-launch for all of these variants will go live on Indiegogo on February 2.


Image Credits: TechCrunch

Bonus: HyperX is launching its first artisan keycap today, Coco the Cozy Cat. The 3D-printed artisan from the gaming brand is available today (starting at 9am EST) and tomorrow and priced at $19.99. Apparently, this is the first in a series of time-limited designs the company plans to drop every month.

Angry Miao’s AM 65 Less is both more and less keyboard than you’ll ever need by Frederic Lardinois originally published on TechCrunch

Apple’s latest silicon innovations shine in the Mac Mini. The tiny desktop computer is the latest Apple computer fitted with the M2 chipset. For $599, buyers can opt for the M2 or spend $1299 for the impressive M2 Pro, which features unique benefits.

For the last several days, my M1 Mac Mini sat on the sidelines while the new Mac Mini used the court. This machine soars. As expected, the new SoC lets the machine easily jump through applications and tasks. That said, the M1 Mac Mini released in 2020 has always worked fine. I’ve used one since launch and still find it adequate. It’s not new-phone fast anymore, though. With this M2 Pro, I feel like an F1 driver with a new set of tires and a tank full of gas. I’m ready to go for another hundred laps.

I threw everything in my daily rotation at the M2 Pro, and it never blinked. It zoomed through media encoding and heavy photo editing. It conquered benchmarks and put up with Chrome’s never-ending quest for system memory. It’s been a joy to use.

The Mac Mini has long been Apple’s most affordable computer. But, occasionally, it was left out of Intel CPU updates over the years, making the computer look unloved and forgotten. Now that Apple is making its chips, the Mac Mini is back in rotation. In 2020, the Mac Mini helped debut the M1 chip. Now in 2023, the Mac Mini, alongside the 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro is debuting the M2 Pro.

Buyers have a couple of options with the M2 Mac Mini. For $599, they can select the base model that features the M2 CPU, 8GB of memory, and 256GB of storage. Spend $799 to upgrade the SSD to 512GB. The M2 Pro is available for $1,299, and for that price, buyers get 16GB of memory, and 512GB of SSD storage. Spend more to upgrade the number of cores in the CPU, and get more system memory and up to 8TB of local storage.

The differences between the M2 and M2 Pro are minor but consequential. The M2 Pro offers significant advantages for some uses. The M2 Pro has double the amount of transistors over the M2 and has twice the memory bandwidth. The M2 has an 8-core CPU with a 10-core GPU. The M2 Pro has up to a 12-core CPU and up to a 19-core GPU. The M2 Pro also has an additional Thunderbolt controller, allowing it to be equipped with 4 Thunderbolt ports instead of the two on the standard M2 Mac Mini. This also allows the M2 Pro Mac Mini to support up-to-three monitors instead of the two from the standard M2.

The M2 Pro in my tester set incredible benchmarks. For example, in Geekbench 5, the multi-core benchmark clocked in at 14,991. That’s several clicks over the performance of the M1 Max in the Mac Studio (12,336) and Intel Xeon W-3245 from late 2019 (14,674). The single-core benchmark was even more telling: the M2 Pro scored 1,932, topping the previous record of 1,900 set by the 13-inch M2-powered MacBook Pro. The M1 Mac Mini scored 1,715.

Benchmarks only tell part of the story.

Let’s look at the placing of the $2,099 M2 Pro against the stock $1,999 Studio M1 Max. Think of the Studio line like super Mac Minis. The Mac Studio with the M1 Pro and Max was released nearly a year ago, in the Winter of 2022. Apple will likely refresh it eventually, but as it sits, it offers distinct advantages over the new M2 Pro Mac Mini even though the benchmarks place the Studio behind the newer computers. The difference comes down to the beefy M1 Max. The Max designation signals the chip has additional CPU cores, video decoding pipelines, and Thunderbolt controllers. The $1,999 Studio also ships with 32GB of RAM, wherein it’s an additional $199 surcharge in the Mac Mini. The Mac Studio has a front-facing SD card slot, which I’d love to have on the Mac Mini.

Apple is keen to point out that the Mac Mini can play video games. But this isn’t a gaming computer. For the Mac Mini to perform well as a gaming computer, the games must use Metal, which means it’s coded directly for Mac OS. Unfortunately, there are very few games on the market in this format. Apple provided me with a copy of Resident Evil Village, and the graphics are the best I’ve ever seen on a Mac. They look great, and the game is smooth and responsive, but I highly doubt anyone is shopping for a Mac Mini with the primary purpose of playing games.

Gaming has never been a Mac selling point. Unfortunately, the M2 doesn’t change that, though it’s lovely to see Apple’s strides in this area.

The M2 chip brings the Mac Mini into a new world of performance. The benchmarks show a computer capable of keeping up with the fastest computers Apple has ever made — and now the performance is available at relatively low prices.

But do you need the M2 Pro? That’s my lingering question. The M1 chips can handle most daily tasks, and the M2 is built from the same secret sauce. So would I find the M2 Pro a must-have upgrade if it was my money? I don’t think so.

I doubt most users would see a difference between an M2 and M2 Pro outside of resource-heavy media editing software. The standard M2 is suited ideally for browsing the Internet and using Apple’s built-in apps. And the standard M2 would still be an impressive upgrade over existing systems. The $599 M2 Mac Mini, even with its limited local storage, seems like a killer deal.

With the M2 and M2, the Mac Mini sits among the most powerful computers Apple offers at any price point. And let’s remember one of the Mac Mini’s main selling points: it’s mini. The Mac Min is a tiny package that offers a lot of flexibility. Bundle it with one of Apple’s Studio Displays for a great iMac alternative, or use it with an inexpensive monitor for a low-cost workstation. As always, the Mac Mini is a value proposition, and it’s never looked better than it does now with the M2 and M2 Pro.

Review: The 2023 Mac Mini is a serious contender with the M2 Pro by Matt Burns originally published on TechCrunch

Apple has resurrected the larger HomePod with a second-generation version that includes better sound, as well as better intelligence and computing smarts. The new HomePod retails for $299 and pre-orders kick off today, with in-store availability and shipping beginning in the U.S. and select other markets on Friday, February 3.

Apple’s new HomePod includes two color options – a white version as wells “Midnight,” a color they’ve favored over a standard black option on most recent product releases, including the M2 MacBook Air. We have yet to see this on the HomePod in person, but if other examples from Apple are any indication, it’s a very dark blue that basically resembles black in most viewing conditions.

This new HomePod is wrapped in an “acoustically transparent mesh fabric,” and also includes support for Siri voice control as well as Apple’s own Spatial Audio technology for immersive sound reproduction. Users can also now create Siri smart home automations entirely on the HomePod using just their voice.

Inside, the HomePod is powered by the S7 chip – the same processor found in the Apple Watch Series 7. That should give it a big performance upgrade over the OG HomePod, which contained an Apple A8, the chip that powered the last iPod touch as well as the iPad mini 4 and iPhone 6.

The HomePod includes room-sensing technology to adapt its sound profile depending on its surroundings, and it can also be stereo-paired with another HomePod for improved sound. You can use them with an Apple TV 4K and eARC for sound system integration, and you can also use them as intercoms throughout the house if you have more than one.

Apple also notes that the updated HomePod includes Matter support and can act as a home hub for Apple’s HomeKit smart home system.

Apple introduces a brand new HomePod with better sound and smarts by Darrell Etherington originally published on TechCrunch

Back in 2017, Wyze made a name for itself with the launch of its original $20 security camera. Over the years, it released its fair share of iterations of the Wyze Cam, with version 3 launching in 2020. Today, it’s launching both a new iteration of the original Wyze Cam, dubbed the Wyze Cam OG, with a launch price of $20 (later $24) as well as a new member of the family, Wyze’s first telephoto camera, the aptly named Wyze Cam OG Telephoto.

The Wyze Cam OG Telephoto will retail for $30 at launch, with the price going up to $34 later. While the regular camera provides a 120-degree field of view, the Telephoto version has a 3x zoom and a 27-degree field of view. Otherwise, they are pretty much identical. These are 1080p HD cameras that feature Wyze’s color night vision, two-way audio support and motion detection, including support for its Cam Plus subscription with features like a web view and AI-powered package, vehicle and pet detection. In their daytime mode, these cameras record up to 20 frames per second, while at night, that drops down to 10 frames.

Image Credits: Wyze

Both cameras are IP65 rated, so they should be quite usable in most outdoor settings (though Wyze recommends you use its $14 outdoor power adapter for this). Both also still use a micro-USB plug. You’re not going to move these cameras around a lot, so that’s not likely an issue. Still, it would be nice to see USB-C here, given that most devices are moving this way.

The only major difference here is that the Wyze Cam OG features an integrated 40 lumen spotlight, which can automatically turn on when the camera detects motion in very low light.

Thanks to updated chips, both cameras can now detect motion and send out notifications three times faster than the company’s other cameras and an upgraded mic and speaker should make two-way audio clearer. Live video in the Wyze app from these cameras also now loads significantly faster.

Image Credits: Wyze

While you can use the OG Telephoto camera as a standalone device, a lot of people will likely use it to augment an existing Wyze camera, maybe to specifically zoom in on a door. For those users, Wyze is launching a new kit with a mount and dual-power cable that allows you to stack both OG cameras on top of each other (in any combination). To enable this, the new cameras now feature a simple hot shoe-like indentation on their tops. On the software side, this is enhanced with Wyze’s new Picture-in-Picture view. Sadly, this PiP view isn’t available for older Wyze cameras.

As for the overall design, Wyze switched things up here a bit, going from the original folding base to a more basic pole the camera now screws into. It makes the camera look a bit more pedestrian but I think it’s a worthwhile tradeoff since it will allow for more accessories and makes the stand easily replaceable.

I’ve tested both cameras for the last week or so and there haven’t been any real surprises. Setup is about as easy as it can be. Indeed, it’s easier than before, since you don’t have to hold any QR code in front of the cameras anymore to connect them to your WiFi network. Instead, the app now finds the new camera for you, you select the network in the app, enter your WiFi password and the camera connects. All of that takes maybe 30 seconds, whereas with earlier Wyze cameras, it could be a few minutes. That’s not exactly a gamechanger, but a nice feature nonetheless.

Overall, video from both cameras is more than sharp enough and the 3x zoom makes for a nice addition, though at least for my use case (watching over my backyard and front porch), it’s not a massive upgrade — more of a nice-to-have. And that’s about all there is. Both cameras worked exactly as expected and while its mobile app isn’t flashy, it never gets in my way. I do wish I could use the PiP view for any random camera combination, though.

It’s worth noting that the original version 1 Wyze Cam had some security issues that — because of hardware limitations — Wyze wasn’t able to patch. Security issues are almost inevitable, but the main issue here was that Wyze was very slow to acknowledge this. That’s something worth keeping in mind — and I think it’s a good idea to keep your IoT devices on a different network from the rest of your home anyway.

Wyze goes back to its roots with the Wyze Cam OG and OG Telephoto by Frederic Lardinois originally published on TechCrunch

The connected home gym gear craze probably experienced its zenith during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, with indicators like Peloton’s fortunes pointing to waning interest as people get back to using their gym memberships. But the category still has plenty of potential, especially if the gear in question can combine smarts with other key value propositions, including a small footprint that can fit into anyone’s home. Vitruvian’s Trainer+ offers that and more, nailing the tricky proposition of offering a comprehensive weight training experience at home while keeping things small and simple.

The basics

The Vitruvian Trainer+ is not cheap. At $2,990, it’s around the cost of six years of gym membership at the average rate paid in the U.S. per month, and that doesn’t include the Vitruvian All Access recurring subscription fee for access to advanced workout features including guided sessions, which is a hefty $39 per month after the first 12 months, which are included free with the purchase of the machine.

That the recurring sub is itself more expensive than the average American pays for their monthly gym membership is a very steep hill to climb, and clearly Vitruvian knows it since they don’t make it very easy to find that pricing on their website — even in the FAQ question that specifically asks how much the membership costs. You can opt to pay for a subscription that lasts the lifetime of your machine for a one-time fee of $990, which is definitely a better deal if you actually are using the machine consistently and plan to continue. Finally, you can always opt not to use the subscription features, which still gives you a very capable piece of workout hardware as long as you’re good at charting your own workout path.

Speaking of the hardware, it’s actually easy to see why even with a base price of nearly $3K, Vitruvian needs to also ask a hefty recurring fee from its users: The Trainer+ is a fantastic piece of kit that no doubt incurred high development and production costs.

What you get is a compact but solid platform with two clips that connect external accessories including various handles, a barbell and ropes to an active resistance mechanism contained within. The platform itself is easy to tuck under a couch or table, and measures just around 46 by 20 inches and weighs only 80 lbs. Considering the range of workouts the Trainer+ offers, and the fact that it can provide anywhere up to 440 lbs of resistance, the fact that it comes in such a relatively small package is incredibly impressive.

The Trainer+ is super easy to set up and pair with your smartphone using a QR code on the machine itself, and the quick clipping system it uses to connect to handles and other accessories is incredibly smart and useful for rapidly switching between different items during a structured workout.

Resistance is controlled by the app, and every time you start a workout the machine requires three setup reps to establish your proper range of motion before you get into doing the exercises with actual weight. Once you do get into an actual exercise, there are three possible modes for each, including one that adds 1 kg (2.2 lbs) with each clean rep, once that decreases weight over time, and a sustained mode where weight stays the same.

Vitruvian's Trainer+ all-in-one home gym device

Image Credits: Vitruvian

Design

On the surface, there’s not much too the Trainer+’s design: The flashiest thing about it is the customizable LED lighting that also offers some helpful visual cues about whether you’re competing reps properly or not. Otherwise, it looks like an overgrown Wii Balance board if you’re old enough to remember what that is, or basically just an elevated stand. The Trainer+’s top surface is made from a carbon-fibre composite, which is fine to use on its own with training shoes, but you can also opt to get the additional soft, tacky mat that is included in either the Entry or Pro level accessory kit (I received the $500 Pro kit in my sample package).

As mentioned, the Trainer+ is around 80 lbs, and it comes in one solid pre-assembled piece. Setup is therefore a breeze compared to just about any other home gym equipment, but you probably should get another person to help you moving it, say, up and down stairs. For moving it around your space, there are wheels on the underside that come in contact with the ground when you tip one end up, making it easy to slide across floors for storing under a couch or desk.

The key to Trainer+’s versatility are its two recessed “Quick Connection System” receptors, which are themselves permanently connected to retractable cables that tie into the device’s programmable active resistance system. The quick connectors allow the included handles and ankle straps to easily snap in, and they release via a simple collar push mechanism that won’t come loose in use but that is dead simple to change out between exercises. This replaces a much more cumbersome carabiner system on the Trainer+’s predecessor, and it’s a fantastic, intuitive upgrade.

Another area where Trainer+’s overall cost of ownership creeps higher still is with the various attachments on offer. There’s a ‘Basic’ kit that adds a long bar, a tricep rope, “premium” handles, the aforementioned workout mat and safety cables. Then the ‘Pro’ kit that I tested the Trainer+ with includes all that, along with a short bar, a belt, and even a bench. You can accomplish a lot with the Trainer+ without any of these things, but the truth is that the experience is greatly enhanced by adding them in – especially the bench and bar – and you can’t buy them piecemeal.

The Trainer+ works with a dedicated Vitruvian companion app, which connects to your machine via Bluetooth. The good thing about the expensive All-Access membership is that it’s tied to the machine, not the individual – meaning anyone in your household (or even visitors) can create their own profile in the app on their own phone and pair with your machine to access all training options and guided workouts. The app itself is great, offering multi-week programs you can follow, trainer-led classes, and a wide range of individual exercises that you can assemble into your own custom workouts if you’re a subscriber, too. I used the app’s guided video on my gym Apple TV via AirPlay and that worked flawlessly as well.

Vitruvian's Trainer+ all-in-one home gym device

Image Credits: Vitruvian

Performance

The Trainer+ is probably going to feel different from other workouts you’ve tried if you haven’t used an active resistance machine in the past: it’s different from either all-in-one cable and weight-based equipment, or free weights. To Vitruvian’s credit, though, the learning curve is not at all steep, and it only takes a couple of sessions before using the Trainer+ feels like second nature.

Vitruvian’s app provides everything you need to use the Trainer+ to max effectiveness, too, whether you’re just starting out, or you’re experienced with personal fitness and looking fro something to fit into or supplement your existing routine. It’s basically as guided or as self-directed as you want, and anywhere in between.

The Trainer+ is also great at making real-time adjustments to your workout based on your strength and performance level. There’s a strength assessment that the app will ask you to do initially to establish your baseline suggested weights for all the various workouts, and you can jump back into that at any point to change that calibration, which is useful to do every few weeks as you progress with your training.

In a month of testing, with near daily use, the Trainer+ had been incredibly consistent. Once you’re done with a workout, you can just let the handles or attachments drop and the cables retract, without having to worry about damaging the durable carbon composite material of the hardware itself. The clips come in and out easily, and the platform is easy to wipe down with simple soap and water when needed. The connection is rock solid and remembers your phone so long as you toggle that option in the app, and the Trainer+ automatically sleeps so you can leave it plugged in all the time if you want.

One issue I found with the machine: The power cable seems to sit rather lightly in the socket on the machine, and until I learned how to steer well clear of it, it was relatively easy to cut power to the Trainer+ just by even lightly brushing the cord itself. That hasn’t been an issue since identifying it as a problem and avoiding any contact with the cord, and it’s possible this was included intentionally as a kind of safety backup, but I’d appreciate a more snug fit between cable and machine.

Bottom line

There’s no question that the Trainer+ is a fantastic piece of home workout hardware, with a smart, useful app that’s at once far more approachable than something like Peloton, but also much more flexible for people who take working out very seriously and want to be able to customize their experience to match.

The real sticking point with Vitruvian’s offering, however, is the price: With the Pro kit, which I do recommend, you’re already at $3,500, and that’s before you start adding in the ongoing cost of the app subscription. That could pay for a fair amount of gym membership, along with some personal training thrown in.

With the Trainer+, however, you get a number of things that are basically impossible to get anywhere else, including a solution that’s so portable it not only works in just about any home or condo setting, but can also easily pack into the car for a road trip – or fit into your #vanlife if that’s what you’re into. It’s much more versatile in this regard vs. other similar active resistance products like the Tonal, too.

If you place a premium on flexibility with almost zero sacrifices vs. a full set of free weights or a much more cumbersome home tower or complete gym, then the Trainer+ is easy to recommend. It’s clearly well-engineered and designed, with a focus on delivering value to actual athletes and fitness buffs who can be notoriously hard to please, and yet it’s also a great place for people to start out their home exercise journeys – so long as they want to commit the the upfront cost that comes with it.

Where to buy: Vitruvian’s website

Vitruvian’s Trainer+ is an all-in-one home gym that actually lives up to its promises by Darrell Etherington originally published on TechCrunch

The connected home gym gear craze probably experienced its zenith during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, with indicators like Peloton’s fortunes pointing to waning interest as people get back to using their gym memberships. But the category still has plenty of potential, especially if the gear in question can combine smarts with other key value propositions, including a small footprint that can fit into anyone’s home. Vitruvian’s Trainer+ offers that and more, nailing the tricky proposition of offering a comprehensive weight training experience at home while keeping things small and simple.

The basics

The Vitruvian Trainer+ is not cheap. At $2,990, it’s around the cost of six years of gym membership at the average rate paid in the U.S. per month, and that doesn’t include the Vitruvian All Access recurring subscription fee for access to advanced workout features including guided sessions, which is a hefty $39 per month after the first 12 months, which are included free with the purchase of the machine.

That the recurring sub is itself more expensive than the average American pays for their monthly gym membership is a very steep hill to climb, and clearly Vitruvian knows it since they don’t make it very easy to find that pricing on their website — even in the FAQ question that specifically asks how much the membership costs. You can opt to pay for a subscription that lasts the lifetime of your machine for a one-time fee of $990, which is definitely a better deal if you actually are using the machine consistently and plan to continue. Finally, you can always opt not to use the subscription features, which still gives you a very capable piece of workout hardware as long as you’re good at charting your own workout path.

Speaking of the hardware, it’s actually easy to see why even with a base price of nearly $3K, Vitruvian needs to also ask a hefty recurring fee from its users: The Trainer+ is a fantastic piece of kit that no doubt incurred high development and production costs.

What you get is a compact but solid platform with two clips that connect external accessories including various handles, a barbell and ropes to an active resistance mechanism contained within. The platform itself is easy to tuck under a couch or table, and measures just around 46 by 20 inches and weighs only 80 lbs. Considering the range of workouts the Trainer+ offers, and the fact that it can provide anywhere up to 440 lbs of resistance, the fact that it comes in such a relatively small package is incredibly impressive.

The Trainer+ is super easy to set up and pair with your smartphone using a QR code on the machine itself, and the quick clipping system it uses to connect to handles and other accessories is incredibly smart and useful for rapidly switching between different items during a structured workout.

Resistance is controlled by the app, and every time you start a workout the machine requires three setup reps to establish your proper range of motion before you get into doing the exercises with actual weight. Once you do get into an actual exercise, there are three possible modes for each, including one that adds 1 kg (2.2 lbs) with each clean rep, once that decreases weight over time, and a sustained mode where weight stays the same.

Vitruvian's Trainer+ all-in-one home gym device

Image Credits: Vitruvian

Design

On the surface, there’s not much too the Trainer+’s design: The flashiest thing about it is the customizable LED lighting that also offers some helpful visual cues about whether you’re competing reps properly or not. Otherwise, it looks like an overgrown Wii Balance board if you’re old enough to remember what that is, or basically just an elevated stand. The Trainer+’s top surface is made from a carbon-fibre composite, which is fine to use on its own with training shoes, but you can also opt to get the additional soft, tacky mat that is included in either the Entry or Pro level accessory kit (I received the $500 Pro kit in my sample package).

As mentioned, the Trainer+ is around 80 lbs, and it comes in one solid pre-assembled piece. Setup is therefore a breeze compared to just about any other home gym equipment, but you probably should get another person to help you moving it, say, up and down stairs. For moving it around your space, there are wheels on the underside that come in contact with the ground when you tip one end up, making it easy to slide across floors for storing under a couch or desk.

The key to Trainer+’s versatility are its two recessed “Quick Connection System” receptors, which are themselves permanently connected to retractable cables that tie into the device’s programmable active resistance system. The quick connectors allow the included handles and ankle straps to easily snap in, and they release via a simple collar push mechanism that won’t come loose in use but that is dead simple to change out between exercises. This replaces a much more cumbersome carabiner system on the Trainer+’s predecessor, and it’s a fantastic, intuitive upgrade.

Another area where Trainer+’s overall cost of ownership creeps higher still is with the various attachments on offer. There’s a ‘Basic’ kit that adds a long bar, a tricep rope, “premium” handles, the aforementioned workout mat and safety cables. Then the ‘Pro’ kit that I tested the Trainer+ with includes all that, along with a short bar, a belt, and even a bench. You can accomplish a lot with the Trainer+ without any of these things, but the truth is that the experience is greatly enhanced by adding them in – especially the bench and bar – and you can’t buy them piecemeal.

The Trainer+ works with a dedicated Vitruvian companion app, which connects to your machine via Bluetooth. The good thing about the expensive All-Access membership is that it’s tied to the machine, not the individual – meaning anyone in your household (or even visitors) can create their own profile in the app on their own phone and pair with your machine to access all training options and guided workouts. The app itself is great, offering multi-week programs you can follow, trainer-led classes, and a wide range of individual exercises that you can assemble into your own custom workouts if you’re a subscriber, too. I used the app’s guided video on my gym Apple TV via AirPlay and that worked flawlessly as well.

Vitruvian's Trainer+ all-in-one home gym device

Image Credits: Vitruvian

Performance

The Trainer+ is probably going to feel different from other workouts you’ve tried if you haven’t used an active resistance machine in the past: it’s different from either all-in-one cable and weight-based equipment, or free weights. To Vitruvian’s credit, though, the learning curve is not at all steep, and it only takes a couple of sessions before using the Trainer+ feels like second nature.

Vitruvian’s app provides everything you need to use the Trainer+ to max effectiveness, too, whether you’re just starting out, or you’re experienced with personal fitness and looking fro something to fit into or supplement your existing routine. It’s basically as guided or as self-directed as you want, and anywhere in between.

The Trainer+ is also great at making real-time adjustments to your workout based on your strength and performance level. There’s a strength assessment that the app will ask you to do initially to establish your baseline suggested weights for all the various workouts, and you can jump back into that at any point to change that calibration, which is useful to do every few weeks as you progress with your training.

In a month of testing, with near daily use, the Trainer+ had been incredibly consistent. Once you’re done with a workout, you can just let the handles or attachments drop and the cables retract, without having to worry about damaging the durable carbon composite material of the hardware itself. The clips come in and out easily, and the platform is easy to wipe down with simple soap and water when needed. The connection is rock solid and remembers your phone so long as you toggle that option in the app, and the Trainer+ automatically sleeps so you can leave it plugged in all the time if you want.

One issue I found with the machine: The power cable seems to sit rather lightly in the socket on the machine, and until I learned how to steer well clear of it, it was relatively easy to cut power to the Trainer+ just by even lightly brushing the cord itself. That hasn’t been an issue since identifying it as a problem and avoiding any contact with the cord, and it’s possible this was included intentionally as a kind of safety backup, but I’d appreciate a more snug fit between cable and machine.

Bottom line

There’s no question that the Trainer+ is a fantastic piece of home workout hardware, with a smart, useful app that’s at once far more approachable than something like Peloton, but also much more flexible for people who take working out very seriously and want to be able to customize their experience to match.

The real sticking point with Vitruvian’s offering, however, is the price: With the Pro kit, which I do recommend, you’re already at $3,500, and that’s before you start adding in the ongoing cost of the app subscription. That could pay for a fair amount of gym membership, along with some personal training thrown in.

With the Trainer+, however, you get a number of things that are basically impossible to get anywhere else, including a solution that’s so portable it not only works in just about any home or condo setting, but can also easily pack into the car for a road trip – or fit into your #vanlife if that’s what you’re into. It’s much more versatile in this regard vs. other similar active resistance products like the Tonal, too.

If you place a premium on flexibility with almost zero sacrifices vs. a full set of free weights or a much more cumbersome home tower or complete gym, then the Trainer+ is easy to recommend. It’s clearly well-engineered and designed, with a focus on delivering value to actual athletes and fitness buffs who can be notoriously hard to please, and yet it’s also a great place for people to start out their home exercise journeys – so long as they want to commit the the upfront cost that comes with it.

Where to buy: Vitruvian’s website

Vitruvian’s Trainer+ is an all-in-one home gym that actually lives up to its promises by Darrell Etherington originally published on TechCrunch

Are you thinking about getting a mechanical keyboard and asked a friend which one to get? Chances are, they said: get a Keychron. It’s basically a meme at this point. After making its name with affordable mechanical keyboards (with a bit of a focus for Mac users) — the company now has something on offer for every budget and in virtually every layout, ranging from the 40% Q9 to the 100% Q6 — and everything in-between. And while the Q-line gets a lot of press, the more affordable pre-built K and V lines go after the non-enthusiast market.

At this point, Keychron has so much of the potential market covered, it’s now starting to offer some more exotic layouts. The latest of these is the Q10, a 75% Alice board with a few twists. It’s probably no surprise that it, too, is an easy recommendation for anybody who is looking for this kind of board.

Image Credits: TechCrunch

As a 75% board, the hefty Q10 (it comes in at just under five pounds), with its full aluminum body, offers function keys, number row and dedicated insert, delete, page up/down and home keys. As you would expect from a modern keyboard, there are hot-swap sockets so you can easily try new switches and there is a knob on the left side. And because there’s a bit of extra room here, Keychron added five macro buttons under the knob as well that you can map to anything you’d like, using what has now become the industry-standard VIA app. Like most modern keyboards, it’ll happily work with your Mac or Windows machine, but there’s no wireless option here (that’s coming to Keychron’s Q line soon, though, starting with the upcoming Q1 Pro). Oh, and there’s per-key RGB, too, if that’s your thing.

This is, of course, a board with an Alice layout — that is, the keys are not in a straight line but the left and right half are slightly angled, which some would claim makes for a more ergonomic typing experience. I don’t know about the ergonomics, especially since the keyboard doesn’t tent like something like an ErgoDox EZ would, but at its core, it’s not all that different from some of the more popular ergonomic keyboards from the likes of Microsoft. It’s quite easy to get used to, even for touch-typists, and quite comfortable to type on.

Otherwise, Keychron is going with its standard setup here: gasket mount for a bit of flex and silicon gaskets between the top and bottom cases to reduce ping and other noise. I never quite find that I notice the gasket mounting in daily use, because you really have to hammer on your keys to get any of that bounce you may have seen in YouTube videos, but then I switch to an older keyboard with a tray mount and notice how hard that feels. Your mileage may vary here, of course. At this point, gasket mounts are the industry standard, it seems, but I do look forward to some innovation here.

Image Credits: TechCrunch

If all of this sounds familiar, then… yeah… basically everything I said in my review of Keychron’s other — but smaller — Alice-style board, the Q8, still applies here, too. Keychron had some early missteps with its Q1 but to the company’s credit, the team quickly learned from that and the community’s feedback. You can modify this keyboard to your heart’s content, but you don’t have to. Sure, you can improve the stabilizers by lubing them yourself (time to break out that dielectric grease), but the pre-lubed ones are good enough, especially because there’s no large rattling space bar to contend with here anyway.

One nice thing Keychron is doing now with its latest board is pre-modding it. One popular trick among enthusiasts is the tape mod, for example, which involves sticking some painters’ tape at the bottom of the PCB to absorb some of the higher-pitched frequencies as you type. On its new boards, Keychron already applies tape to the bottom of the PCB itself. I think the board could still benefit from some thicker foam at the bottom of the case (but there isn’t a lot of room there, so I haven’t tried yet).

Keychron also uses Gateron G Pro switches, which come pre-lubed (as you can see, there’s a lot of lubing going on in the mechanical keyboard world). And while I continue to hope that Keychron will offer more options than just the linear Red, tactile Brown and clicky Blue switches (yellow would be nice, Keychron…), those are competent options.

Image Credits: Keychron

My review unit came with brown switches, which some people like, but I find to fall into the uncanny valley between tactile and linear. They just aren’t all that tactile, yet also not quite linear. I prefer linear switches, but if I use a tactile switch, I want to feel that tactile bump as I press down. I had a set of pre-lubed three-pin Gateron CAP Golden Brown switches lying around here (as one does), which are a bit more tactile and made me enjoy the keyboard quite a bit more. They also have a slightly lower pitch than the standard Geteron brown switches.

Keychron’s default keycaps, which come with the pre-built board, are fine. They are double-shot PBT keycaps in the OSA profile. That profile is higher and rounder than you may be used to from Cherry keycaps, but that’s easy enough to get used to. Keychron does make a nice set of $40 Cherry-style keycaps, though, which I prefer, both in terms of profile and sound. Maybe one day, Keychron will offer that as an option.

As usual, the company offers its keyboard as a bare-bones kit. That will set you back $195 plus shipping. That’s also the only way to get the dark purple colorway. Fully assembled, with switches and keycaps (stabilizers are included in both versions), you pay $215 plus shipping. Personally, I’d pay the extra $20 and get a set of switches and keycaps to try, but if you already know your preferences and have boxes full of keycaps just waiting to be used, then the bare-bones is probably the way to go (just make sure your own set supports Alice layouts, with their unusual double spacebars).

Keychron doesn’t really have a lot of competition in this space right now; 75% Alice-style boards are a bit of a rarity, though there is the Feker Alice 75 from the Epomaker group, with similar specs, but a $329 price tag (which includes keycaps but not switches). One advantage here is that it includes Bluetooth support. There aren’t a lot of other in-stock options available, though you may find some 75% Alice group buys every now and then and maybe KBDfans will bring back its Mountain Ergo at some point (but that was well over $450 for the bare-bones kit).

If you want a smaller board, there are a few more options, including Keychron’s aluminum Q8 (which is my daily driver) and the cheaper, non-gasket-mount V8. And like with all Keychron models, a $100 V10 is on its way, too.

 

Keychron gets it right with its Q10 Alice-style keyboard by Frederic Lardinois originally published on TechCrunch